Back
2025 Supreme(Bom) 1393
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
AMIT BORKAR, J.
The Lokmanya Pan Bazar Association Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra – Respondent
Civil Writ Petition No. 8145 of 2014, Interim Application No.13159 of 2025, Civil Application Nos. 2359, 2360, 2361 of 2019
Decided On : 09-12-2025
For the Appellants : Chetan Kapadia, Rohan Agarwal, Harshavardhan Nankani, Deeksha Jani, Haleema Marchant, Jinay Jain
For the Respondents: V.S. Nimbalkar, Akash Menon, Anjana Vijay, Rajiv Singh, V.S. Vengurlekar, Nair Vengurlekar
MOFA applies to flat purchases, overriding claims of artificial membership definitions, and entitlement to statutory conveyance must not be impeded by contractual language. Natural justice is upheld by valid notice and opportunity for objection.
Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act - Sections 10, 11 - Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 - Section 20 - Writ petition challenging deemed conveyance granted to cooperative society - Petitioner challenged validity post construction, claiming no conveyance to society as members were mere 'Special Patron Members' - Court found that purchasers acted as flat buyers with statutory rights under MOFA, holding that MOFA applies to the transaction at hand. (Paras 20, 21, 49)
(B) Natural Justice - Application for deemed conveyance was claimed to be improper due to alleged non-service of notice at correct address - Court held notice was validly served at petitioner's registered office, and no real prejudice was shown. Issues regarding alleged lack of notice were deemed unfounded. (Paras 31, 52)
(C) Equitable Considerations - Court noted considerable inaction on part of petitioner, allowing the society to operate as the effective owner, thus denying any sudden legal claims against conveyance. (Paras 46, 49)
Findings of Court:
The Competent Authority acted within its jurisdiction in allowing the application for deemed conveyance, fulfilling all statutory requirements. The certificate of deemed conveyance was upheld, and the writ petition was dismissed.
Result: Writ petition dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the society.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to deemed conveyance. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's and respondent's actions regarding redevelopment. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. petitioner's claims on alleged improper proceedings. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. arguments on mofa applicability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. allegation against the use of the term 'special patron member'. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. defenses regarding service and notification. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 7. determining mofa applicability to transaction. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 8. court's view on maintainability of deemed conveyance application. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 9. valid formation of respondent no.3 society. (Para 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 10. allegations of violation of natural justice. (Para 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 11. assessing the impact of the ulc exemption order. (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 12. impact of precedent cases on this case. (Para 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
| 13. conduct of parties influencing the case. (Para 46 , 47 , 48) |
| 14. final order of the court. (Para 54 , 55 , 56 , 57) |
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BORKAR, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition to challenge the judgment and order passed by Respondent No. 2, the Competent Authority. By the said order, deemed conveyance has been granted in favour of Respondent No. 3 Society in respect of Buildings B and C together with the land admeasuring 2989 square meters on which the said buildings stand.
2. Relevant facts as narrated by petitioner: The petitioner company was incorporated on 12 June 1968 as a company limited by guarantee without share capital. At that time, its registered office was at Lokmanya Pan Bazar, Girgaum, Mumbai 400004. The Memorandum of Association contains clauses relevant to this dispute. Clause 4 permits the company to construct and develop land or premises for the use and benefit of its members. Clause 13 authorises the company to purchase or take on lease property essential for its activities and to acquire rights including Vahiwat and allied rights. Clause 115 permits the company to sell, improve, exchange, lease or otherwise deal with its property to earn income. The Articles of Association contain corresponding clauses governing administration and membership.
3. In 1969, the petitioner purchased land admeasuring 16,302 sq. mtrs. at Survey No.292, Hissa No.1 (Part), CTS No.628, Kurla East, off Eastern Express Highway, Mumbai. The petitioner also became owner of adjoining land admeasuring 3,840 sq. mtrs. by adverse possession. After enactment of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976, a substantial part of the land was declared surplus vacant land. On 13 October 1977, the State Government granted exemption under Section 20 of the ULCR Act for 17,550 sq. mtrs. of this land subject to strict conditions. The land was to be used only for construction for the members of the petitioner. No transfer was permissible except with prior permission of the State Government and upon payment of the differential amount between market value and the statutory acquisition price. On 31 October 1979, the State Government extended the timeline for commencement and completion of construction. On 21 November 1981, Respondent No.4 developer was authorised to construct four buildings for persons admitted as Special Patron Members of the petitioner. Only two buildings, Harshad B and Harshad C, were constructed. A development agreement dated 23 November 1981 authorised Respondent No.4 to construct the buildings and enrol allottees as Special Patron Members. There was no clause permitting formation of a co-operative society or conveyance of land. Ownership of the land remained with the petitioner. Clause 1(b) of the development agreement recorded that the petitioner would enrol Special Patron Members and allot flats, shops, garages and parking spaces in the buildings to be constructed. A supplemental development agreement dated 30 November 1988 created an ad-hoc committee of eight Special Patron Members to manage Harshad B and C. The petitioner passe
