Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a retired individual and member of the Ambaji Niketan Cooperative Housing Society, challenged an interlocutory order passed by the Cooperative Court in a dispute filed by the society. The dispute alleged that the petitioner was occupying a flat in the society's building, which was constructed in 1962. From 2009 onwards, the society considered redevelopment of the property due to its age and need for repairs. The society passed resolutions and entered into a development agreement with M/s Bholenath Developers Ltd. The petitioner opposed the redevelopment and refused to vacate the flat. The Cooperative Court, in an application below Exh.5, directed the petitioner to hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the flat within one month, failing which a private receiver would take possession. The petitioner appealed to the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, which upheld the order. The petitioner then filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The High Court examined the concurrent findings of the courts below and held that the Cooperative Court had jurisdiction to pass such an interlocutory order. The court noted that the society had a prima facie case for redevelopment, the balance of convenience was in favour of the society, and the petitioner would not suffer irreparable injury as he would be entitled to alternate accommodation or compensation. The High Court dismissed the petition, finding no grounds for interference.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Interference with Interlocutory Orders - The High Court will not interfere with an interlocutory order passed by a subordinate court or tribunal unless there is a grave miscarriage of justice or the order is perverse or without jurisdiction. The petitioner failed to demonstrate any such exceptional circumstances. (Paras 1-10)
B) Cooperative Societies - Interlocutory Orders - Possession - Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Sections 91, 96 - The Cooperative Court has jurisdiction to pass interlocutory orders including directions for possession pending final adjudication of a dispute. The court must consider prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury. (Paras 4-6)
C) Cooperative Societies - Redevelopment - Possession - Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - The society's resolution for redevelopment and the developer's agreement create a prima facie case for the society to seek possession of the flat from the member. The balance of convenience lies in favour of the society to facilitate redevelopment. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court should interfere under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India with an interlocutory order passed by the Cooperative Court directing the petitioner to hand over possession of a flat to the society pending adjudication of the dispute.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the concurrent orders of the Cooperative Court and the Appellate Court. The court found no grounds for interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Law Points
- Interlocutory orders
- Cooperative Court jurisdiction
- Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227
- Possession pending dispute
- Prima facie case
- Balance of convenience
- Irreparable injury
Case Details
WRIT PETITION NO.8910 OF 2012
Mr. P.M. Shah with Dharmesh Jain and Maulin Tanna for petitioner; Mr. V.S. Kapse with Upendra Mahadik for respondent No.1; Mr. G.S. Bhat for respondent No.2.
Ambaji Niketan Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. & M/s Bholenath Developers Ltd.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging concurrent interlocutory orders of the Cooperative Court and the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court directing the petitioner to hand over possession of a flat to the society.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to quash the interlocutory order dated 21st June 2012 passed by the Cooperative Court and the order of the Appellate Court upholding it.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was aggrieved by the order directing him to vacate the flat pending adjudication of the dispute filed by the society.
Previous Decisions
The Cooperative Court passed an interlocutory order below Exh.5 in CCI/08/12 on 21st June 2012 directing the petitioner to hand over possession. The Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court upheld that order.
Issues
Whether the High Court should interfere under Articles 226 and 227 with an interlocutory order of the Cooperative Court directing possession pending dispute.
Whether the Cooperative Court had jurisdiction to pass such an order and whether it properly considered prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that the interlocutory order was without jurisdiction and that the Cooperative Court could not direct possession without a final adjudication.
The respondents argued that the society had a prima facie case for redevelopment, the balance of convenience was in favour of the society, and the petitioner would not suffer irreparable injury as he would be entitled to alternate accommodation.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court will not interfere with an interlocutory order passed by a subordinate court or tribunal under Articles 226 and 227 unless there is a grave miscarriage of justice or the order is perverse or without jurisdiction. The Cooperative Court had jurisdiction to pass the order, and it properly considered the prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury.
Judgment Excerpts
By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the concurrent orders passed at an interlocutory stage by the Cooperative Court and the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court Mumbai.
The Trial Court in a dispute which was filed, being CCI/08/12, has passed an interlocutory order which is in the following terms: (a) that the petitioner who is respondent No.1 shall hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the flat on the first floor of the building bearing No.21 within a period of one month from the date of the order, i.e. 21st June 2012.
Procedural History
The society filed a dispute (CCI/08/12) before the Cooperative Court. The Cooperative Court passed an interlocutory order below Exh.5 on 21st June 2012 directing the petitioner to hand over possession. The petitioner appealed to the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court, which upheld the order. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
- Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960: Sections 91, 96
