The Competent Authority must ensure a fair and transparent process, including giving proper opportunities to all concerned parties and thoroughly considering disputed entitlements, before granting deemed conveyance.

JUDGMENT:

1. Heard. Taken up for final hearing by consent of parties.

2. This Writ Petition is filed under the provisions of Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by the Petitioner – Audumbar Chaya CHS Ltd. to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 05.03.2021 (for short “the impugned order”) passed by the District Deputy Registrar Co-operative Society, Mumbai City (4) granting certificate of Deemed Conveyance in favour of Respondent No.2 – Shanti Co-operative Housing Ltd. Writ Petition is filed on 25.10.2021 and challenges all consequential actions pursuant to the impugned order and seeks a direction to the Corporation to revoke the redevelopment permission dated 06.10.2021 granted in favour of Respondent No.2.

3. Record indicates that pursuant to passing of the impugned order, Deemed Conveyance has been executed and registered by the District Deputy Register, Cooperative Societies and Competent Authority under Section 5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (for short “MOFA”) to Respondent No. 2 on 11.06.2021.

4. Writ Petition is vehemently resisted by Respondent No.2. Respondent No.1 is represented by the learned AGP. Affidavit-in-Reply dated 17.01.2023 is filed by Respondent No.1.

5. In order to appreciate the lis between the parties, it would be appropriate to note the relevant facts for consideration.

(i) Petitioner - Society is admittedly the owner of CTS Nos.1311, 1312, 1313, 1314 and 1287 situated at Village Eksar, Tal. Borivali. Building Nos.A1 and A2 belong to Petitioner – Society. Building No.A3 belongs to Respondent No.2 – Society and is standing on CTS No.1313. Building No.A1 stands on CTS No.1311 (part) and 1312 (part) on a plot ad-measuring 862.10 square meters, Building No.A2 stands on CTS Nos.1312 (part) and 1313 (part) on a plot of land ad-measuring 1434.69 square meters. One 13.4 meter internal DP road ad-measuring 558.11 square meters is carved out of CTS Nos.1311 (part) and 1312 (part) and cuts across building Nos.A1 and A2. Another 13.4 meter DP road is perpendicular to the above DP road. CTS No.1313 ad-measures 991.90 square meters. CTS No.1314 ad-measures 256.20 square meters whereas CTS Nos.1287 ad-measures 142.9 square meters. The total land of 5 CTS Nos. ad-measures 3473.74 square meters. Dispute between the two Societies is with respect of entitlement to areas of CTS Nos.1314 and 1287.

(ii) Petitioner – Society is registered in the year 1974. It consists of two buildings known as 'A1' and 'A2' standing on CTS Nos.1311 and 1312. Building A1 consist of 25 flats/members whereas building A2 consist of 40 flats/members. Both building A1 and A2 are under redevelopment/reconstruction since 2007. Petitioner contends that by Indenture dated 22.01.1975 the original owner conveyed the entire plot including area in the 5 CTS Numbers to the Petitioner. Copy of the deed of Indenture dated 22.01.1975 is annexed to the Petition, second schedule of which refers to area ad-measuring 2949 square meters. This position is however disputed by Respondent No.2 by stating that the entire plot was never conveyed and only land below building Nos.A1 and A2 was conveyed.

(iii) Though it is not argued by either sides, to complete the above fact, in the Affidavit-in-reply of Respondent No.2, at page No.164 of Petition, Respondent No.2 has appeared an agreement for sale between Petitioner and one of its member which records that pursuant to Agreement dated September, 1973 with the original owner the Petitioner – Society entered into the said property on or about 27.09.1979. The said property refers to CTS Nos.1313, 1314 and 1287.

(iv) In 1982, Petitioner put the flat purchasers of Respondent No.2 in possession of their respective flats.

(v) Sometime in October 2005, Petitioner was approached by flat purchasers/occupants of building A3 who expressed their desire to bifurcate the plot on which it was standing from the Petitioner’s p