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

2025 Supreme(Telangana) 1649

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
T. MADHAVI DEVI, J.
 
T.S. Ramakrishnan - Appellant
Vs.
The State Of Telangana - Respondent
Writ Petition No.13605 of 2025
Decided On : 17-11-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Yakarapu Sheelu
For the Respondent: GP For Cooperation

The lack of a date on a Tribunal order is grounds for invalidation, requiring the resolution of cooperative disputes to begin with the Registrar as outlined in the Telangana Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act.

Headnote:(A) Telangana Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act, 1995 - Section 37(1) - Challenge to Tribunal's order regarding maintenance charges - Petitioners seek quashing of undated order of Tribunal deemed arbitrary, illegal, and contrary to the Act - The maintenance model adopted was voted on by members - The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction as disputes relate to cooperative society matters requiring resolution by Registrar prior to Tribunal. (Paras 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 15)

(B) Jurisdiction of Tribunal - The order passed by a single member of the Tribunal is unsustainable as it is crucial that orders include a date and follow procedural requirements set forth in the Telangana Cooperative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules. (Paras 8, 12)

(C) Maintenance of common areas - The Court emphasizes that the dispute on merits regarding maintenance charges must be resolved in accordance with the established procedures under the Act. (Paras 10, 15)

Facts of the case:
A writ petition filed by flat owners challenging a Tribunal order that suspended the ‘per square foot’ maintenance charge system and mandated a uniform charge, leading to unrest in their cooperative society.

Findings of Court:
The undated order from the Tribunal was found unsustainable and set aside, directing a rehearing with adequate opportunity for both parties.

Issues: The main issues were whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction and whether the order's lack of date compromised its validity.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that a dated order is essential for judicial validity, and jurisdiction must lie with the Registrar for disputes among cooperative society members.

Result: Writ Petition is disposed of, order of Tribunal set aside.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek to quash tribunal's maintenance charge order. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. division among society members over maintenance charges. (Para 4)
3. tribunal's jurisdiction under the telangana act questioned. (Para 5 , 6)
4. lack of date on tribunal order as basis for annulment. (Para 8 , 11 , 12)
5. order set aside; tribunal to rehear case. (Para 15)
6. writ petition disposed with no costs. (Para 16 , 17)

ORDER :

T. MADHAVI DEVI, J.

In this Writ Petition, the petitioners are seeking a Writ of Certiorari calling for records relating to and in connection with the undated common order passed in I.A.No.13 of 2025 in O.P.No.02 of 2025 and in I.A.No.23 of 2025 in O.P.No.07 of 2025 on the file of the Cooperative Tribunal at Hyderabad and to quash or set aside the same holding it as non-est, illegal, irrational and arbitrary and without jurisdiction and also as contrary to law and as being in violation of Section 37 (1) of the Telangana Mutually Aided Cooperative Societies Act , 1995 and consequently to direct the respondents to follow the ‘per square foot’ model or ‘flat size prorata basis’ model for payment of common area maintenance charges as already approved by the respondent cooperative society and to pass such other order or orders.

2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Writ Petition are that the petitioners who are 140 in number are all purchasers of the flats of different extents in a multi-storied residential complex namely ‘Jains Balaji Nilayam Casa Waterside’ situated in Survey No.228 (old Survey No.44/1 & 44/2) at Safilguda, Malkajgiri, Medchal-Malkajgiri District through various registered sale deeds. According to the petitioners, the sale deeds recited that maintenance amount was being collected by the developer M/s. Jain Constructions at the rate of Rs.48/- per square foot per annum based on flat size and also recited the obligation of the purchasers to have a residential association and to observe its rules and bye-laws. It is stated that the residential complex comprises of 5 blocks of flats known as A, B, C, D & E and each block consisted of 104 flats totalling to 520 flats with 16 variant extents ranging from 1330 square feet (sft.) to 2635 sft., being 2, 3 and 4 bedroom flats. It is submitted that the developer maintained the complex till September, 2024 and thereafter, the flat owners including the petitioners, formed a society by name JBN Casa Waterside Flat Owners Mutually Aided Cooperative Maintenance Society Limited and registered the same with registration No.TG/MLKG/MACS/2024-62/FOW&M issued by the Registrar-cum-District Cooperative officer, Medchal-Malkajgiri District. An Ad hoc Committee was also appointed by respondent No.3 authority and the bye-laws of the society were also framed and registered. The required quorum of the General Body meeting as per the bye-laws is 1/3rd of the total members.

3. According to the petitioners, on 01.09.2024 the first General Body meeting was conducted and all the flat owners of the said residential complex paid the common area maintenance charges at Rs.4/- per square foot per month based on the flat size for two quarters period, i.e., 6 months period covering the period from October, 2024 to March, 2025. Thereafter, on 03.11.2024, the second General Body meeting was held and a 25 Member Committee was approved to be formed who were all members of different flat sizes to work and analyse the common area maintenance model and the Committee submitted its report on 08.12.2024 recommending hybrid model by dividing the common area maintenance into two components, (i) building expenses based on flat size; and (ii) other common expenses equally/uniformly by all the flat owners. It is submitted that on 15.12.2024, the third General Body meeting was held and the members of the General Body proceeded to physical voting process and all the members were required to opt for one out of three models, i.e., (1) Hybrid model proposed by the Board of Directors of

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top