SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Bom) 1489

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Amit Borkar, J.
Tanvi’s Diamoda Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. - Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Office of Ld. Government Pleader and ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.8631 of 2025
Decided On : 20-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Manan Sharma
For the Respondent: Ms. Sulbha D. Chipade, AGP, Mr. Ashish J. Dubey

The mandatory condition for membership in a cooperative housing society requires that all dues be cleared before any transfer of membership is effective, regardless of the buyer's prior obligations.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227 - Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Section 23(2) - Writ petition challenging the orders confirming denial of membership for failure to clear outstanding dues - The society's refusal was communicated within ninety days, making the appeal under Section 22(2) unmaintainable. (Paras 5, 9, 12, 30)

(B) Membership Criteria - The requirement under Section 154B-7 mandating payment of dues before membership transfer is mandatory and non-negotiable. The auction purchaser cannot claim membership without settling previous arrears. (Paras 11, 12, 26, 27)

(C) Legal Precedent - Distinguishing case law where dues were in dispute, emphasizing the validity of membership refusal when dues are undisputed. (Paras 20, 21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner society denied membership to respondent No.4 due to outstanding dues from the previous member, Mrs. Saroj Mehta. Despite multiple notices, dues remained unpaid, leading to a contested transfer of membership after an auction sale.

Findings of Court:
The Court clarified that the refusal communicated within statutory time is enforceable and the previous member's dues must be cleared for new membership to be granted.

Issues: Whether the society's refusal was lawful and if dues must be settled prior to approving membership for an auction purchaser.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the society lawfully exercised its right to insist on payment of dues before granting membership, upholding statutory requirements under the Act.

Result: Writ petition allowed; the refusal stands restored and membership contingent on clearing dues.

Judgement Key Points
  • The petitioner housing society invoked writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging orders confirming denial of membership due to unpaid dues. (!) (!) [1]

  • Mrs. Saroj Mehta, previous member, failed to pay maintenance charges and property taxes despite multiple notices from the society. [2]

  • Indian Overseas Bank took possession under SARFAESI Act and sold the premises to respondent No.4 via auction without society's no objection certificate; society had informed bank of outstanding dues of Rs.57,96,197 up to 30 June 2012. [3]

  • Respondent No.4 applied for membership on 19 June 2021; society issued notice on 15 September 2021 (within 90 days) refusing membership until clearance of all outstanding dues. [4]

  • Respondent No.4 appealed under Section 22(2), which was allowed by respondent No.3; society's revision before respondent No.2 was dismissed on 14 January 2025, leading to the writ petition. [5]

  • Society argued refusal was within 90 days under Section 23(2), appeal unmaintainable; Section 154B-7 mandates payment of dues before effective transfer, applicable even to auction purchasers under SARFAESI. [6]

  • Respondent No.4 argued auction purchaser not liable for previous dues. [7]

  • In rejoinder, society distinguished facts where dues were undisputed here, unlike cases with disputed quantum. [8]

  • Core issue: whether society's refusal within 90 days was lawful given admitted arrears. [9]

  • Section 154B-7 restricts transfer of share/interest unless society's dues are paid and transferee acquires membership; mandatory condition using negative language. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) [10][11][12]

  • Section 154B-12 allows transfer by registered document following procedure, but subject to Section 154B-7 conditions. (!) [11][12][14]

  • Ownership of flat transfers via sale/auction, but society membership requires statutory compliance, including dues clearance; protects society's financial stability. [11][12][13][15][16][17]

  • Auction purchaser gets title but must clear undisputed dues for membership; not personally liable but statutory condition attaches to property. [15][16][17]

  • No exemption for auction sales under SARFAESI; society's dues claims remain enforceable alongside creditor rights. [23][24][25]

  • Dues here undisputed; society communicated refusal on 87th day, satisfying Section 23(2); no deemed membership under Section 22(2) where timely refusal exists. [4][6][9][26][27][28]

  • Writ petition allowed; lower orders set aside; refusal restored; membership upon dues clearance, no costs. [29][30][31][32][33]


Table of Content
1. writ petition jurisdiction invoked. (Para 1)
2. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
3. arguments regarding membership dues. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)
4. procedural clarity on refusal. (Para 9 , 10)
5. mandatory payment of dues for membership. (Para 11 , 12)
6. membership governed by statutory conditions. (Para 13 , 14)
7. transfer obligations remain. (Para 15 , 16)
8. legal position of auction purchaser clarified. (Para 17 , 18 , 19)
9. previous judgments analyzed for applicability. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
10. sarfaesi act does not override dues. (Para 23 , 24 , 25)
11. proper communication and action taken by society. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
12. court's orders and final decision delivered. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33)

JUDGMENT :

Amit Borkar, J.

1. The petitioner housing society has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The challenge is to the Judgment and Order dated 14 July 2025 passed by respondent No.2. By the said order, respondent No.2 confirmed the Judgment and Order passed by respondent No.3 under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

2. The material facts are as follows. Gala No.103 in the petitioner society belonged to one Mrs. Saroj Mehta. She was a member of the petitioner society. She did not pay maintenance charges and property taxes for a long period. The petitioner society issued several notices to her calling upon her to clear the dues. She did not comply. The default continued and the arrears remained unpaid.

3. Indian Overseas Bank took physical possession of Gala No.103 under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The petitioner society, by letter dated 25 May 2017, informed the Bank that an amount of Rs.57,96,197 was outstanding towards maintenance in respect of the said premises up to 30 June 2012. Indian Overseas Bank thereafter executed a sale certificate dated 15 March 2021 and sold the premises to respondent No.4 under a sale deed dated 27 April 2021. The sale was completed without obtaining a no objection certificate from the petitioner society.

4. Respondent No.4, on 19 June 2021, applied to the petitioner society for transfer of membership. He enclosed a cheque towards transfer fees. The petitioner society, through its Advocate, addressed a notice to respondent No.4 stating that the amounts of Rs.100 and Rs.500 tendered towards membership would not be deposited until clearance of all outstanding dues related to the premises. The notice dated 15 September 2021 also called upon respondent No.4 to pay the arrears and informed him that membership could not be granted unless dues were cleared. The communication was issued within ninety days and therefore amounted to a refusal under Section 23(2) of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

5. Respondent No.4 thereafter filed an appeal under Section 22(2) registered as Appeal No.15 of 2021 before respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 allowed the appeal by order dated 22 July 2022. The petitioner society challenged that order by filing Revision Application No.421 of 2022 before respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 dismissed the revision by order dated 14 January 2025. The petitioner has therefore approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

6. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner society had communicated its refusal within the statutory period. He pointed out that the society informed respondent No.4 on the eighty seventh day that his request for membership could not be accepted unless the outstanding dues of the previous member were cleared. He submitted that once such refusal was communicated within ninety days, an appeal under Section 22(2) was not maintainable. He further submitted that Section 154B 7 mandates that no transfer of shares becomes effective unless all dues of the housing society are paid. He argued that even when a purchaser acquires a unit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top