Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
KAMAL KHATA
Satish Murlidhar Inamdar – Appellant
Versus
Amogh Sawant – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to termination of development agreement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. society's definition as a 'promoter' under mofa. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. distinguishing from previous judgments. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. binding effect of judicial findings on society's obligations. (Para 15 , 17 , 19) |
| 5. finalization of third-party claims and dismissal of appeals. (Para 39 , 40) |
JUDGMENT :
1. These Appeals challenge the Order dated 4th April 2024 passed by the Trial Court in Notice of Motion No. 282 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No. 98 of 2024, Notice of Motion No.229 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.97 of 2023, Notice of Motion No.234 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.3145 of 2023, Notice of Motion No.228 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.101 of 2023, Notice of Motion No.233 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.3146 of 2023, Notice of Motion No.230 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.100 of 2023 and Notice of Motion No.232 of 2024 in S.C. Suit No.97 of 2023 whereby the Appellants’ Notice of Motions seeking interim reliefs came to be dismissed. By the said Notice of Motions, the Appellants had sought an interim injunction restraining Respondent Nos. 2 to 5, from carrying out any demolition or construction activity on the suit property without the express
Third-party purchasers cannot enforce rights against a society after the termination of the developer's agreement; their remedies lie solely with the developer.
Landowner granting limited FSI/TDR rights to independent developer, reserving balance acknowledged by purchasers, not 'promoter' under MOFA; cannot be injuncted from using reserved rights; bare injun....
The absence of a direct contractual relationship prohibits third-party purchasers from claiming specific performance against the society post-termination of the development agreement.
(1) Home buyer cannot be made to wait for possession of flat for indefinite period.(2) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 do not exclude jurisdiction of consumer forum.
The Competent Authority under MOFA cannot adjudicate title disputes; it must fulfill statutory obligations to issue deemed conveyance to the Society.
The court established that an agreement recognizing tenants as owners of flats, coupled with the receipt of consideration for those flats, qualifies the landlord as a promoter under the Maharashtra O....
The court upheld the Developer's right to amend construction plans under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, emphasizing the need to consider balance of convenience and irreparable injury in grantin....
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 ....
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
