Case Note & Summary
The judgment text provided is truncated and does not include the court's analysis or final decision. From the available text, the High Court was hearing an interim application and an appeal related to a dispute over construction and conveyance in a co-operative housing society. The plaintiffs, Malad Kokil Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., sought a decree for conveyance of the suit property, a declaration that concessions/relaxations in the Approval Report dated 5 December 2009 and Commencement Certificate dated 13 October 2010 were null and void, and an injunction restraining further construction. The backdrop was that developers had constructed four buildings (S-1 to S-4) over 208 residential tenements and shops, and the occupants had formed two co-operative societies. The plaintiff society registered in 1982 consisted of flat purchasers in buildings S-1, S-2, S-3; the other society (defendant no.6 and appellant in the appeal) consisted of purchasers of S-4, registered in 1993. Occupation certificates were issued between 1975 and 1996. Plaintiffs alleged that the developers initially proposed only ground+three floors, but on 3 September 2010 unknown persons entered and demolished structures, damaging common amenities. Through RTI, plaintiffs learned of the approval report and commencement certificate permitting development of about 7722 sq. meters. They contended that FSI was almost exhausted, so no further construction was permissible. The other society filed a similar suit in the City Civil Court; its interim injunction application was dismissed. The High Court had earlier granted ad-interim relief on 7 July 2011. Legal arguments canvassed included: the developers' duty to convey the property under MOFA Section 4 and an undertaking given at society formation; the invalidity of concessions granted free of FSI; the arbitrary exercise of power under DCR Regulation 64(b); and the binding nature of a government order under MRTP Act Section 154 which prohibited loading TDR without executing conveyance. The court heard arguments but the text ends before any reasoning or decision. Hence, the outcome and ratio decidendi are not available in the provided text.
Issue of Consideration
NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 1359 of 2011
