IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of the Competent Authority's enquiry under section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, and the dismissal of the Petition due to delay, laches, and the nature of the claim.

JUDGMENT:

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

2. By this Petition, Petitioner has challenged order dated 16 March 2012 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City-3 and Competent Authority granting conditional unilateral deemed conveyance of land admeasuring 4342.06 square meters and building constructed thereon in favour of Respondent No.4-Society as well as communication dated 19 October 2013 withdrawing the conditions imposed in the certificate of deemed conveyance. The Petition was originally filed by Vasundhara Dhananjay Dongre through her power of attorney holder Mr. Nilesh Muzumdar. On the death of original Petitioner, her legal heirs are brought on record as Petitioner Nos.1A to 1C, who are prosecuting the Petition through their constituted power of attorney Mr. Nilesh Muzumdar.

3. Facts of the case as reflected in the Petition are as follows. Land bearing CTS Nos.143, 144, 144(1) to (5), 145, 146, 146(1) to (3), 147, 147(1) to (13), 148, 149, 150 and 151 was originally owned by Petitioner’s grand-father Shri Vishnu Bhalchandra Paranjape. He developed the land by amalgamating the same in the year 1994, when the said plots were assigned new CTS No.143. Petitioner has given details as to how the said land devolved upon various legal heirs upon death of Vishnu Bhalchandra Paranjape. It is Petitioner’s case that her father Moreshwar @ Baburao Vishnu Paranjape inherited a share in his father’s property and died intestate on 2 September 1978. It is Petitioner’s case that she and her brother Jayant Moreshwar Paranjape had undivided share in larger properties owned by Paranjape family including CTS No.143 (new). It is Petitioner’s case that her mother’s name continued to be reflected in the property card relating to CTS No.143(new). Petitioner accuses Respondent Nos.6 to 9 who are other members of Paranjape family of illegal land grabbing by unauthorizedly selling the writ land to Respondent No.4-Society without obtaining the consent of the Petitioner. That Respondent Nos.6 to 9 incorporated a Company in the name and style as Paranjape Land Developers Private Limited (Respondent No.5) for selling various properties of Paranjape family.

4. Respondent No.5 carried out development on the writ land and executed flat purchase agreements with the purchaser of flats in the building constructed on the writ land. The flat purchasers formed Respondent No.4-Krishna Co-operative Housing Society Limited. The Society applying for issuance of unilateral deemed conveyance under section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA). That Petitioner was not issued notice in respect of the said application nor was she heard despite having right, title and interest in the writ land. That the documents produced by the Respondent No.4-Society before Competent Authority were inadequate and relevant documents were not produced to prove title in favour of Respondent No.5 promoter which could be conveyed to the Respondent No.4-Society under section 11 of the MOFA. Petitioner has raised pleadings to demonstrate as to how the title of Respondent No.5 was imperfect which could not have been conveyed in favour of the Respondent No.4-Society under section 11 of the MOFA. That Respondent No.5 unauthorizedly gave consent for issuance of certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of Respondent No.4-Society.

5. The Competent Authority passed order dated 16 March 2012 granting unilateral conveyance in respect of land admeasuring 4342.06 square meters at CTS No.143 (part) at village Vile Parle, Mumbai Suburban District alongwith building constructed thereon in favour of Respondent No.4-Society subject to the three conditions: (a) Society getting the Agreement dated 24 February 1994 executed by M/s. B.V. Paranjape HUF in favour of Respondent No.5