AGK/VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2222 OF 2025 VAIBHAV

1 Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd.

RAMESH JADHAV A Joint Stock Co., registered under the Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Indian Companies Act VII of 1973, Date: 2025.02.24 15:54:00 +0530 functioning under the Companies Act 1956 (No. I of 1956), being the Builder and landowner as per 7/12 extract, having address at Kantilal House 14, Mama Parmanand Marg, Mumbai 400 004.

2 Rajesh Himatlal, Aged about 67 years.

3 Wonder Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd.

Opponents Nos. 2 and 3 being the Landlords as per 7/12 extracts, having last known address at Survey No.329, 330 Hissa No. 1, CTS No. 1478, 1482, N. L. Complex, Anand Nagar, Dahisar (East), Mumbai 400 068 … Petitioners V/s.

1 Shri Panchamrut CHS Ltd.

Having address at Survey No. 329, 330, Hissa No. 1, CTS No. 1478, 1482, N. L. Compound, Anand Nagar, Dahisar (East), Mumbai 400 068

2 The State of Maharashtra, (Through Co-operation and Textile Department) Mumbai

3 District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai City (4) Competent Authority, U/s 5A of The MOFA, 1963, having their office At Bhandari Bank Building, 2^nd floor, P. L. Kale Guruji Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai 400 028 …Respondents Mr. Vishal Kanade with Mr. Haresh Lulia, Ms. Janvee Joshi and Mr. Mangesh Shinde for the petitioners.

Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud with Mr. Janay Jain, Mr. Amit Tungare, Karthyayani Amblimath and Akhata Katara i/by Asahi Legal for respondent No.1.

Ms. Vaishali Nimbalkar, AGP for respondent Nos.2 and

3-State.

CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J.

DATED : FEBRUARY 24, 2025 JUDGMENT.:

1. The petitioners, being aggrieved, have preferred this writ petition impugning the order dated 15th October 2024 passed by the Competent Authority, i.e., respondent No.3. By the impugned order, respondent No.3 has purported to grant unilateral deemed conveyance under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion, Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as “the MOFA Act”). The said order, it is alleged, bestows upon respondent No.1- Society the conveyance of land ad-measuring 4925.62 square metres together with undivided rights in the Recreational Ground (RG) area ad-measuring 869.23 square metres, in aggregate constituting 5794.85 square metres. The property at issue pertains to Survey No./Hissa No.330/6 corresponding to CTS Nos.1482/A/1/1 and 1482/A/1/2, and Survey No./Hissa No.330/3 corresponding to CTS No.1484 of Village Dahisar, Taluka Borivali, City Survey Office, Borivali in the Mumbai Suburban District. The petitioners assert that the order impugned is untenable in law and deserves interference by this Court.

2. The factual matrix, culminating in the institution of the present writ petition, may briefly be delineated hereunder.

Respondent No.1-Society, representing certain allottees/flat purchasers, initiated proceedings before respondent No.3 seeking to obtain deemed conveyance in respect of the subject property under Section 11 of the MOFA Act. The petitioners herein, being the original promoters/developers, are said to have executed various agreements with the members of respondent No.1-Society under Section 4 of the MOFA Act. However, disputes emerged between the parties concerning the precise extent of the land to be conveyed and the inclusion of the RG area in the conveyance. Consequently, respondent No.1-Society pursued unilateral conveyance of the entire land in question, including the RG area, prompting the petitioners to file objections which, they submit, have been disregarded by respondent No.3 in a perfunctory manner, culminating in the impugned order.

3. In order to substantiate their case, respondent No.1-Society filed Deemed Conveyance Application No.76 of 2024 before the Competent Authority (respondent No.3). The basis of their claim for the deemed conveyance rested upon the agreements entered into under Section 4 of the MOFA Act and oth