The Competent Authority's jurisdiction under Section 11 of the MOFA Act is limited to enforcing the promoter's obligations, not adjudicating title disputes, which must be resolved in civil courts.

JUDGMENT.:

(AMIT BORKAR, J.)

1. The petitioner takes exception to an order dated 26th July 2021 passed by respondent No.1 in Deemed Conveyance Application No.D.C.1006568/2019/1608 granting unilateral deemed conveyance under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (“MOFA Act”) in respect of land admeasuring 13718.26 sq. mtrs. along with construction admeasuring 12048.83 sq. mtrs. on the land at Mouje Tathavade, Taluka Mulshi, District Pune.

2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the filing of the instant writ petition are as under:

Respondent No.2 filed Deemed Conveyance Application No.1006568 of 2019 before respondent No.1. The petitioner is promoter and developer of the scheme. The members of respondent No.2 – Society purchased units / flats as per agreement to sale which was based on sanctioned plan dated 24th December 2010. According to the petitioner, as per sanctioned plan dated 24th December 2010, permissible FSI was 12,086.87 sq. mtrs. And sanctioned units were 219. The said sanctioned plan was revised on 4th April 2014 by the petitioner without consent of respondent No.2 – Society. However, the revision of plan does not change position of FSI.

3. The respondent No.2, therefore, filed Special Civil Suit No.1482 of 2019 before the Civil Judge Senior Division, Pune seeking relief of specific performance of the agreement to sale, and further seeking declaration that lay-outs dated 4th April 2012 and 26th May 2014 be declared as illegal and void. The respondent No.2 further prayed injunction against the petitioner and Municipal Corporation not to revise existing plan of the property without the consent of members of the respondent No.2–Society.

4. The petitioner contests the deemed conveyance application by asserting that respondent No. 2-Society has already initiated Special Civil Suit No. 1482 of 2019, seeking specific performance, damages, and impugning the sanctioned plan pertaining to the subject land. It is contended that the Competent Authority under the Act is jurisdictionally barred from adjudicating the application filed by respondent No. 2, as the civil suit involves overlapping issues of title, contractual obligations, and validity of the sanctioned plan, which fall squarely within the domain of the civil court. The petitioner further avers that all flat purchasers affiliated with respondent No. 2-Society were duly apprised of, and expressly consented to, the phased construction of seven buildings under the development scheme. It is underscored that the execution of conveyance was contingent upon the completion of all seven buildings, as per the mutual understanding between the parties. Consequently, the petitioner asserts that the application for deemed conveyance, instituted prior to the culmination of the entire project, is premature, lacks contractual and statutory foundation, and ought to be dismissed in limine for being devoid of merit.

5. Respondent No. 1, the Competent Authority, upon a comprehensive evaluation of the documentary evidence on record and the submissions advanced by both parties, rendered the impugned order. The Authority concluded that respondent No. 2- Society is legally entitled to the conveyance of land admeasuring 13718.26 sq. mtrs. and constructed area admeasuring 12048.83 sq. mtrs