Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in MOFA Conveyance Dispute — Cooperative Housing Society Fails to Establish Entitlement to Deed of Conveyance Against Church Trust. Court holds that under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, the obligation to execute a conveyance arises only if the promoter has developed the land and the society has paid the full consideration, which was not proved.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 50
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Our Lady of Vailankanni and Perpetual Succour Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., filed a suit (SC Suit No.875 of 2011) in the City Civil Court, Mumbai, seeking a mandatory injunction and execution of a deed of conveyance against the respondent, St. Michael's Church, a public charitable trust, which owned the land on which the society's buildings were situated. The society claimed that under the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 (MOFA), the church was obligated to execute a conveyance in its favor. The society also filed Notice of Motion No.957 of 2011 seeking interim relief. The trial court dismissed the notice of motion on 04.05.2016, holding that the society failed to make out a prima facie case. Aggrieved, the society appealed to the Bombay High Court. The High Court examined the provisions of MOFA, particularly Section 11, which imposes an obligation on a promoter to execute a conveyance in favor of the society after the society has paid the full consideration. The court noted that the church was the owner of the land but had not developed it; the development was carried out by a third party developer, Suraj Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd. The society did not produce any evidence to show that the church was a 'promoter' under MOFA or that the society had paid the full consideration for the land. The court also considered the principles for granting a mandatory injunction at an interim stage, which requires a strong prima facie case and balance of convenience in favor of the applicant. The court found that the society failed to establish these requirements. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's order. The court also disposed of the civil application.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Mandatory Injunction - Prima Facie Case - The court considered the principles for granting a mandatory injunction at an interim stage, requiring a strong prima facie case and balance of convenience in favor of the applicant. The appellant failed to establish that the respondent was a 'promoter' under MOFA or that the society had paid full consideration for the land. (Paras 1-9)

B) Property Law - Conveyance - Section 11 of Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 - Obligation of Promoter - The obligation to execute a deed of conveyance under Section 11 MOFA arises only if the promoter has developed the land and the society has paid the full agreed consideration. The appellant did not produce evidence of payment or that the respondent was the promoter. (Paras 2-9)

C) Trust Law - Public Charitable Trust - Ownership of Land - The respondent, a public charitable trust, was the owner of the land. The court noted that the trust had not developed the property; the development was done by a third party developer. Hence, the trust could not be compelled to execute a conveyance under MOFA. (Paras 2-9)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant/plaintiff cooperative housing society is entitled to a mandatory injunction directing the respondent/defendant church trust to execute a deed of conveyance in respect of the land on which the society's buildings are situated, under the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The order dated 04.05.2016 passed by the Learned 2nd Additional Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai, dismissing Notice of Motion No.957 of 2011, is upheld. Civil Application No.798 of 2016 is disposed of accordingly.

Law Points

  • Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act
  • 1963
  • Section 11
  • Conveyance
  • Promoter
  • Cooperative Housing Society
  • Mandatory Injunction
  • Notice of Motion
  • Prima Facie Case
  • Balance of Convenience
  • Irreparable Loss
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2016 LawText (BOM) (07) 56

Appeal from Order No.624 of 2016 with Civil Application No.798 of 2016

2016-07-18

R.M. Savant

Mr. G. S. Godbole i/by Mr. A. V. Jain for the Appellant, Mr. C. Martis for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Praveen Samdani, Senior Advocate i/by M/s. Shiralkar & Co. for Respondent No.3, Ms. Sharmila Deshmukh for Respondent No.5 MHADA

Our Lady of Vailankanni and Perpetual Succour Cooperative Housing Society Ltd.

St. Michael's Church, Rev. Fr. Simon Borges, Suraj Estate Developers Pvt. Ltd., Our Lady of Lourdes Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., The Mumbai Building Repairs and Reconstruction Board (MHADA)

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

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeal from order dismissing notice of motion for mandatory injunction and execution of deed of conveyance.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought a mandatory injunction directing the respondent to execute a deed of conveyance in its favor.

Filing Reason

The appellant claimed that the respondent, as owner of the land, was obligated under MOFA to execute a conveyance in favor of the society.

Previous Decisions

The trial court dismissed the notice of motion on 04.05.2016, holding that the appellant failed to make out a prima facie case.

Issues

Whether the appellant is entitled to a mandatory injunction for execution of a deed of conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA. Whether the respondent is a 'promoter' under MOFA and whether the appellant has paid full consideration.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the respondent, as owner of the land, is a promoter under MOFA and is obligated to execute a conveyance. The respondent contended that it is not a promoter, that the development was done by a third party, and that the society has not paid full consideration.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963, the obligation to execute a deed of conveyance arises only if the promoter has developed the land and the society has paid the full agreed consideration. The appellant failed to establish that the respondent was a promoter or that full consideration was paid. Therefore, no prima facie case for a mandatory injunction was made out.

Judgment Excerpts

The above Appeal from Order takes exception to the order dated 04.05.2016 passed by the Learned 2nd Additional Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai, by which order, Notice of Motion No.957 of 2011 filed by the Appellant/original Plaintiff came to be dismissed. The reliefs by the Plaintiff in the said suit are therefore revolving around the provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963 (For short 'the MOFA').

Procedural History

The appellant filed SC Suit No.875 of 2011 in the City Civil Court, Mumbai, seeking mandatory injunction and execution of deed of conveyance. The appellant also filed Notice of Motion No.957 of 2011 for interim relief. The trial court dismissed the notice of motion on 04.05.2016. The appellant then filed the present appeal before the Bombay High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963: Section 11
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal in MOFA Conveyance Dispute — Cooperative Housing Society Fails to Establish Entitlement to Deed of Conveyance Against Church Trust. Court holds that under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act, 1963...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Categorization Under 1992 Guidelines for Premature Release of Life Convict in Murder During Robbery Case. Petitioner's Offence of Murder During Robbery Correctly Categorized Under Category 5(a) of the ...