IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ., PRANAV TRIVEDI, J.
Ajaybhai Purshottamdas Patel - Applicant
Versus
Rutul Park Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. & Ors. – Respondents
R/Civil Application (For Condonation Of Delay) No. 3543 Of 2024 In R/Letters Patent Appeal No. 653 Of 2024 With R/Special Civil Application No. 9304 Of 2023 With Civil Application (For Stay) No. 1 Of 2024
Decided On : 05-07-2024
Condonation - Letters Patent Appeal - Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961; Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, 1973 - The court condoned the delay in filing the appeal and upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge regarding the redevelopment of a dilapidated building, emphasizing the statutory provisions governing cooperative societies and ownership flats.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought condonation of a 28-day delay in filing a Letters Patent Appeal against a judgment allowing a cooperative housing society to redevelop a dilapidated building, which the appellant opposed, claiming ownership rights over common areas.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the society's decision to redevelop was valid under the relevant statutes, and the appellant's claims regarding ownership rights were unfounded as they conflicted with the society's bylaws and statutory provisions.
Issues: Whether the Writ of mandamus could be issued against a private member of a cooperative society regarding redevelopment decisions made by the society.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a member of a cooperative society is bound by the society's decisions and bylaws, and cannot claim individual rights that contradict the majority's decision for redevelopment.
Result: The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merits.
Key Points: - The court condoned the 28-day delay in filing the Letters Patent Appeal (!) . - The Letters Patent Appeal challenged a Single Judge's order allowing a cooperative housing society to redevelop a dilapidated building (!) . - The building, constructed in 1978, was found to be in a dilapidated, dangerous, and structurally unsafe condition (!) . - 11 out of 12 members (91.67%) of the Society consented to the redevelopment (!) . - A member of a cooperative society is bound by the society's decisions and bylaws, losing individual rights in favor of collective governance (!) . - Members of a cooperative society cannot claim individual rights that contradict the majority's decision for redevelopment (!) . - The Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, 1973, particularly Section 41A, allows for the redevelopment of a building with the consent of at least 75% of the flat owners (!) (!) . - The appellant's claim of ownership rights over open space based on a 1978 resolution was unfounded as it conflicted with the society's bylaws and statutory provisions (!) (!) . - The court held that the contractual obligations of a member emanate from statutes like the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961, and the Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, 1973 (!) . - The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merits, upholding the redevelopment process initiated by the society (!) .None
JUDGMENT :
(Sunita Agarwal, CJ.) :
Order in Civil Application (for Condonation Of Delay) No. 3543 of 2024
1. Heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
2. The Civil Application No.3543 of 2024 is preferred by the applicant for condonation of delay of 28 days in preferring the Letters Patent Appeal. The delay is explained to the satisfaction of the Court. The delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. The delay condonation application is allowed. The office shall allot regular number to the appeal.
Order in Letters Patent Appeal No. 653 of 2024
3. The present Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the Writ petition filed by the respondent Society seeking relief against the Notice dated 03.06.2022 issued by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation directing the original petitioner, namely the Society and its members to repair and secure the dilapidated, dangerous and ruinous structure of the petitioner society, instead of taking steps to demolish the structure for reconstruction. A prayer has also been made to issue directions to the respondent no.6, appellant herein, to vacate his Flat No. A/1 in the petitioner Society by issuing necessary directions to the Corporation to do the needful.
4. As noted by the learned Single judge, the original petitioner is a cooperative housing society registered under the provisions of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 and is the owner of Final Plot No. 117 Paiki (admeasuring 1000 sq. mtr.) in Town Planning Scheme No. 19 of Mouje Sheikhpur-Khanpur, Ahmedabad-3 (Memnagar Vibhag), Taluka Sabarmati, District Ahmedabad.
5. The Society had constructed 12 residential apartments comprising of different types of flats in the year 1978 and allotted them to various persons. The construction of flats being more than 45 years old, they are in highly dilapidated and dangerous state and are structurally unsafe and not repairable anymore. There are corrosion in many of the RCC slabs, beams, columns and foundation due to long term seepage of rain water and water leakage in service lines. The Structural Engineer in its report dated 21.05.2022 has stated that the building in question is in dilapidated and dangerous condition and the structure is so heavily damaged that it is not in a position to be repaired. The notice given by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation dated 03.06.2022, subject matter of challenge, also states the same.
6. The Society has entered into a MOU dated 10.04.2022 for providing better amenities to its members, namely :-
b) Specification
c) Lift, Bore, Water Tank, Solar Panel etc.
d) Rent
e) Gift Money
f) Transportation cost
g) Furniture and Fixture amount
h) Bank Guarantee
7. It is also brought on record that the State Bank of India, who is the owner of Flat No. C/1 in the petitioner society had given in-principle consent for redevelopment and has signed MOU on 05.05.2023.
8. In the facts of the case, it was noted that 11 out of 12 members, i.e. 91.67% members of the Society have consented and signed the MOU, which has been entered by the petitioner Society with the respondent No.5. Recording the above noted facts, it was also noted by the learned Single Judge that each and every communication made by the respondent no.6, viz. the appellant herein has been answered by the original petitioner.
9. It was further noted that the respondent no.6 is in unauthorised occupation of the residential premises for commercial purpose and has applied for regularisation of the unauthorised construction under Section 11(2) of the Gujarat Regularisation of Unauthorised Development Act, 2022 ('GRUDA Act'). The pendency of the said application can in no way stall the process of redevelopment as any decision under the said Act shall not determine the ownership rights of the unauthorised development. While the learned Single Judge has proceeded to refer to the provisions of S
Members of a cooperative society must adhere to the society's decisions and bylaws, losing individual rights in favor of collective governance.
A co-operative society's decision for redevelopment, supported by majority consent, is binding on all members, and individual objections cannot impede the process if statutory conditions are satisfie....
The court upheld the validity of the redevelopment process under Section 41A of the Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, 1973, and directed the respondents to vacate their flats and hand over peaceful and va....
The court upheld the validity of the redevelopment project under Section 41A of the Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, 1973, based on the majority consent of the members, dilapidated condition of the build....
A cooperative society can proceed with redevelopment if 75% of members consent, prioritizing safety and majority decisions over individual objections.
Majority consent in cooperative societies is binding for redevelopment under Section 41A of the Gujarat Ownership Flats Act, enabling courts to enforce compliance despite minority objections.
1. Substantial compliance with statutory provisions for redevelopment of a building is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the law.
2. A writ court has the jurisdiction to issue a writ of ma....
Non-cooperative members of a co-operative society are bound by redevelopment decisions made by the majority, and courts can exercise powers under Section 9 to direct them to vacate premises for redev....
The public interest in the redevelopment scheme and the lack of infringement of the petitioners' fundamental or legal rights were the main legal points established in the judgment.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that dissenting members of a cooperative society are bound by the decisions of the general body, and the court has the authority to order mandatory....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.