Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, owner of a larger property, had constructed a building and sold flats to purchasers who formed Respondent No. 2 Society. The Petitioner had undertaken phase-wise development, and individual agreements reserved the right to construct additional buildings on the remaining land. Disputes arose leading to cross suits, which were settled by consent terms dated 18.02.2000 and consent decrees dated 06.02.2009. The consent terms provided that the Petitioner would pay Rs. 18 lakhs to the Society, and the Society would execute a perpetual lease of 4756.71 sq. m. to the Petitioner at a nominal rent, while the Petitioner would execute a deed of conveyance for the larger property. The parties acted upon these terms for 22 years, but the deed of conveyance was not executed. In 2020, the Society applied for deemed conveyance under Section 11(3) of MOFA before the Competent Authority, suppressing the consent decrees. The Competent Authority granted deemed conveyance for 8384.57 sq. m. out of the larger property, despite the consent terms. The Petitioner challenged this order. The Court held that the consent decrees operate as res judicata and estoppel, and the Competent Authority has no jurisdiction to override them. The impugned order and certificate were quashed, and the parties were directed to execute the documents as per the consent terms.
Headnote
A) MOFA - Deemed Conveyance - Section 11 of Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 - Consent Decree - Competent Authority cannot grant deemed conveyance in violation of binding consent decrees passed by a civil court, as such decrees operate as res judicata and estoppel between parties (Paras 1-3). B) Civil Procedure - Consent Decree - Res Judicata - A consent decree is a binding judgment and operates as res judicata between the parties, precluding any claim contrary to its terms (Para 3). C) MOFA - Jurisdiction of Competent Authority - Section 11 of MOFA - The Competent Authority under MOFA does not have jurisdiction to override or overreach the terms of a consent decree that has settled the rights and entitlements of the parties (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Competent Authority under Section 11 of MOFA can grant deemed conveyance contrary to the terms of a consent decree passed by a civil court which crystallizes the rights of the parties.
Final Decision
The impugned order and certificate both dated 04.03.2022 are quashed and set aside. The parties are directed to execute the deed of conveyance and indenture of lease in accordance with the consent terms and consent decrees within a stipulated time.
Law Points
- Consent decree operates as res judicata
- Competent Authority under MOFA cannot override civil court decrees
- Deemed conveyance cannot be granted contrary to consent terms
- Estoppel by consent decree
