Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
Prem Villa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. – Petitioner
Versus
Uma Deep Co-operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 4159 of 2022
Decided On : 29-07-2024
Corrigendum - Deemed Conveyance - Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 - Sections 5A, 11 - The court interpreted the powers of the Competent Authority under the MOFA, emphasizing that a corrigendum cannot substitute a substantive review and must be limited to correcting typographical errors.
Fact of the Case:
The Petitioner challenged a corrigendum issued by the Competent Authority regarding deemed conveyance orders for two housing societies, arguing that the corrigendum was beyond the authority and barred by limitation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Competent Authority exceeded its jurisdiction by issuing a corrigendum that effectively reviewed the original orders, which was not permissible under the MOFA.
Issues: Whether the Competent Authority had the jurisdiction to issue a corrigendum that effectively reviewed the original deemed conveyance orders after a significant delay.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a corrigendum cannot be used to substitute a substantive review and that the authority lacked the power to review its earlier orders without statutory provision.
Result: The impugned corrigendum was quashed, restoring the original deemed conveyance orders.
JUDGMENT :
MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
1. By the present Writ Petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the legality and validity of the Common Corringendum/Order dated 14.01.2020 by which Corrigendum is issued with respect to the following two Orders:
(ii) Order dated 28.02.2014 passed in Deemed Conveyance Application No. 98 of 2013 in favour of the Petitioner-Society.
2. Before setting out the rival contentions and consideration of the same, it is necessary to set out certain factual aspects:
(ii) The Petitioner-Prem Villa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (“Petitioner-Society”) was formed on 15th March 2002. Respondent No. 5-Ashwin Premji Gada was the Promoter of the Petitioner-Society. The Petitioner-Society on 19.12.2012 filed Deemed Conveyance Application No. 98 of 2013 under Section 11 of the MOFA.
(iii) Both these Deemed Conveyance Applications were heard and allowed by a separate Orders dated 28.02.2014.
(iv) Accordingly, a Certificate of Deemed Conveyance was issued in favour of the Respondent No. 1-Society (Page No. 69), which reads as follows:
(v) The Certificate of Deemed Conveyance issued in favour of the Petitioner-Society is on Page No. 115, which reads as follows:
(vi) After issuance of the Order granting Deemed Conveyance dated 28.02.2014, the unilateral deed of assignment dated 18.06.2014 conveying 659.50 sq. mtrs. of land by Deed No. KRL-3/5193 of 2014 was executed in favour of the Petitioner-Society and the same has been registered on 20.06.2014.
(vii) On 12th March 2019, the Respondent No. 1 filed an Application after a period of about 5 years seeking rectification in the Order dated 28.02.2014. In the said rectification, the Respondent No. 1-Society sought the joint ownership of the entire area of the subject land.
(viii) By the impugned Order dated 14.01.2020, the Competent Authority had issued the Corrigendum/Rectification issuing Corrigendum to the Deemed Conveyance Certificates issued in favoour of the Petitioner - Society and the Respondent No. 1-Society by issuing the Deemed Conveyance jointly in favour of both these Societies. The relevant portion of said Corrigendum/Rectification Order is on Page No. 87, which reads as follows:
“Corrigendum/Rectification Order
In exercise of powers conferred upon me under section 5A of Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, I, Dr. Prashant Sonawane, District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (2), Eastern Suburbs, Mumbai and Competent Authority under section 5A of Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 I pass this common corrigendum in order dated 28/02/2014 in Deemed Conveyance application no. 49/2013 of society no. 1 and order dated 28/02/2014 in Deemed Conveyance application no. 98/2013 of society no. 2 and hereby grant the joint Assignment of Lease to (1) Uma Deep Co.op. Hou. Soc. Ltd., Sevaram Lalwani Road, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400 080, and 2) Prem Villa Co. Op. Hou. Soc. Ltd. SMPR School Marg, Mulund (W), Mumbai 400 080 the description of plot of land should be read as “CTS No. 1400A, 1400/1 to 19, Sevaram Lalwani Road, Mulund (W), Mumbai-400080 for area admeasuring 1189 sq.m.” jointly in favour of both societies.”
(Emphasis added)
The said Order dated 14.01.2020 is challenged by filing the present Writ Petition.
3. Mr. Dharmadhikari along with Mr.
A corrigendum under the MOFA is limited to correcting typographical errors and cannot be used to substantively review prior orders.
The jurisdictional limits of the Competent Authority prevent it from issuing a Corrigendum that effectively constitutes a substantive review of its prior order.
The Competent Authority cannot issue a Corrigendum that materially alters a previous order without proper jurisdiction and adherence to natural justice principles.
The Competent Authority's failure to ensure service of notice and adherence to natural justice principles invalidates the ex parte decision regarding Unilateral Deemed Conveyance.
Disputes over excess area or title in deemed conveyance orders under MOFA Section 11(3) are for civil courts, not writ jurisdiction; promoters cannot retain land via private clauses against statutory....
Promoter under MOFA s.11 must convey full right, title, interest in proportionate land/building to society of completed segment despite incomplete layout; procedural defects invalid only on prejudice....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the conveyance of land must be in accordance with the agreement between the parties, and a technical violation of natural justice may not warr....
Co-owners must be made parties and given hearing before Competent Authority grants unilateral deemed conveyance under MOFA Section 11; natural justice mandatory, no prejudice needed to prove where pr....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
