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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 249073

BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Milind N. Jadhav, J.
Rajesh Kejriwal v. Quantum Park CHSL
W. P. No. 5057 of 2024



1. Heard Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate for Petitioners in Writ Petition No.5057 of 2024 and Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024; Ms. Kapre, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Writ Petition No.5057 of 2024; Ms. Natekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024; Ms. Gavhane, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024 and Mr. Lohia, learned Advocate for Applicant in Interim Application Nos.10632 of 2024 and 10633 of 2024.

2. At the outset, Mr. Kulkarni would submit that name of Respondent No.2 has been changed. Interim Application No.10632 of 2024 is filed by original Respondent No.2 seeking the aforesaid change. There is no objection to the said Application. Application deserves to be allowed.

3. In view of the submissions made in Application, Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Necessary amendment is permitted to be carried out within a period of one week from today. Re - verification stands dispensed with.

4. Learned Advocates for parties are ad idem and would submit that originally there was a group of 6 Petition out of which 4 were disposed by order dated 21.01.2025. Present two Writ Petition No.5057 of 2024 and Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024 are required to be disposed of on similar lines as per order dated 21.01.2025 passed in the 4 companion Writ Petitions.

5. In view of the submissions made by learned Advocates, Writ Petitions are disposed of by following order: -
5.1. Leave is granted to amend the Writ Petitions by incorporating prayer for grant of membership to Respondent No.1 - Society consequent to setting aside the order dated 25.08.2023.
5.2. Writ Petition Nos.5057 of 2024 and Writ Petition No. 5088 of 2024 are filed challenging orders dated 25.08.2023 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co - operative Societies, Mumbai, H/W - Ward, Mumbai, rejecting Application preferred by the Petitioners for membership of the Respondent - Society and the order dated 13.12.2023 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co - operative Societies, Mumbai, rejecting their Revision Petition. Petitioners in these Petitions are the purchasers of Flat Nos.A / 1304 and A / 1303 in the building of Respondent No.1 - Society vide registered Agreements for Sale dated 22.02.2022 executed with M/s. AHCL - PEL. Though M/s AHCL - PEL as a developer has been admitted as a member of Respondent No.1 - Society, the Society has refused to admit Petitioners as its members on account of pendency of two sets of litigations in this regard relating inter alia to legality of the two flats constructed on 13rd floor of the building. By citing the pretext of pendency of said Suits, Deputy Registrar has proceeded to reject the applications filed by Petitioners under the provisions of S.22 of the Maharashtra Co - operative Societies Act, 1960 (for short 'MCS Act') for their admission as members of Respondent No.1 - Society. The Divisional Joint Registrar has upheld the order passed by the Deputy Registrar by his order dated 13.12.2023, which is also subject matter of challenge in the present Petitions.
5.3. I have heard Mr. Kulkarni, learned Advocate for Petitioners in Writ Petition No.5057 of 2024 and Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024; Ms. Kapre, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Writ Petition No.5057 of 2024; Ms. Natekar, learned Advocate for Respondent No.1 in Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024; Ms. Gavhane, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in Writ Petition No.5088 of 2024 and Mr. Lohia, learned Advocate for Applicant in Interim Application Nos.10632 of 2024 and 10633 of 2024 and with able assistance perused the record of the case. Submissions made by them have received due consideration of this Court.
5.4. So far as the issue of grant of membership to a purchaser of alleged unauthorised flat / unit is concerned, the issue appears to be well settled by judgment of this Court in Videocon Appliances Ltd. v. Maker Chambers V. Premises Co - op. Socy. Ltd. (Writ Petition No.7471 o



















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