Bombay High Court Quashes Deemed Conveyance Order Under MOFA Due to Lack of Notice to Developer. Section 11 of MOFA Requires Notice to All Parties Before Granting Unilateral Conveyance.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 92
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, M/s. ACME Enterprises (a partnership firm) and its partner Mr. Ummedra K. Vardhan, challenged an order dated 26th November 2019 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Competent Authority under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA). The order granted a unilateral deemed conveyance in favor of Respondent No.2, Neelam Nagar Building Nos.11A to 11J Co-operative Housing Society Association Limited, without any notice to the petitioners. The petitioners contended that they were the developers of the property and had not been given an opportunity of being heard before the order was passed. The respondents argued that the petitioners had no locus standi as they were not the original owners. The court examined the provisions of Section 11 of MOFA and the principles of natural justice. It held that the Competent Authority must issue notice to all interested parties before granting deemed conveyance. Since no notice was given to the petitioners, the order was vitiated. The court quashed the order and remanded the matter to the Competent Authority for fresh consideration after hearing all parties. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.

Headnote

A) MOFA - Deemed Conveyance - Section 11 of Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 - Natural Justice - The Competent Authority granted deemed conveyance without issuing notice to the developer. The High Court held that such an order violates principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. (Paras 1-10)

B) Cooperative Housing Society - Conveyance - Section 11 of MOFA - The society applied for deemed conveyance under Section 11. The developer was not heard. The court quashed the order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration after hearing all parties. (Paras 2-8)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether an order granting deemed conveyance under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 can be passed without notice to the developer/promoter.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The impugned order dated 26th November 2019 is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Competent Authority for fresh consideration after hearing all parties. Rule made absolute. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Natural justice
  • Notice requirement
  • Deemed conveyance
  • Section 11 MOFA
  • Unilateral order
  • Opportunity of hearing
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2023 LawText (BOM) (06) 122

WRIT PETITION NO. 5230 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 3700 OF 2023

2023-06-05

N. J. JAMADAR

Mr. Ashish Kamant, Senior Advocate, a/w Sandeep Bhagwat and Ms. Sarita Zarapkar, for the Petitioner. Mr. Kedar Dighe, AGP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, a/w Ajinkya Udane and Vinayak Pandit, for Respondent No.2.

M/s. ACME Enterprises & Mr. Ummedra K. Vardhan

Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies (2), Eastern Suburb, Mumbai & Competent Authority under Section 5A of MOFA & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging an order granting deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA without notice to the developer.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the order dated 26th November 2019 granting deemed conveyance.

Filing Reason

The order was passed without notice to the petitioners, violating principles of natural justice.

Previous Decisions

The Competent Authority passed the order on 26th November 2019 granting deemed conveyance in favor of Respondent No.2.

Issues

Whether the order granting deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA is valid when passed without notice to the developer.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners: The order was passed without any notice to them, violating natural justice. They are the developers and have a right to be heard. Respondents: The petitioners have no locus standi as they are not the original owners. The order was validly passed.

Ratio Decidendi

An order granting deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA cannot be passed without notice to the developer/promoter, as it violates principles of natural justice.

Judgment Excerpts

The petitioners take exception to an order dated 26th November, 2019, passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies and the Competent Authority, granting an unilateral deemed conveyance under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties heard finally.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 26th November 2019 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Competent Authority. The petition was heard and reserved on 27th February 2023 and pronounced on 5th June 2023.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963: Section 11, Section 5A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Quashes FIR in Stalking and Insult Case Due to Inordinate Delay and Lack of Prima Facie Case. FIR under Sections 354D and 504 IPC Quashed as Allegations of Following and Sending Messages Lacked Specifics and Were Filed Nine Months ...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Corporation in Octroi Duty Challenge Due to Curing of Procedural Defect and Valid Classification of Tax. Failure to Publish Final Resolution in Official Gazette Was Not Fatal Under Section 38(1)(b) of City of Bangalore...