WRIT PETITION NO. 151 OF 2019
15 Apr 2025...
Search Results for "Housing Cooperative Society"
1016 result(s) found
Found 1016 result(s)
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal by Dissenting Members in Cooperative Housing Society Redevelopment Dispute — Majority Decision Upheld. Court holds that minority members cannot stall redevelopment process approved by 80 out of 88 members, and objections regarding additional area do not justify interim injunction.
8 Nov 2023The case involves an appeal by 8 members (appellants) of Neel Shantiniketan Co-operative Housing Society Limited against an order of the City Civil Co...
- 103
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeals Against Order of Reference to Arbitration in Suit for Specific Performance and Injunction. Court Holds That Disputes Involving a Housing Society and Its Members Regarding Development Agreement Are Arbitrable Under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
9 Sep 2019The judgment arises from two appeals filed against an order of a Single Judge of the Bombay High Court referring the parties to arbitration under Sect...
- 126
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition for Non-Compliance of Undertaking to Vacate Flats in Cooperative Society Dispute. Court Holds That Contemnors' Failure to Vacate Does Not Amount to Willful Disobedience Given Ongoing Proceedings and Status Quo Orders.
8 May 2019The Supreme Court dismissed contempt petitions filed by Sant Lal Gupta and others against Umesh Kumar Jain and others for alleged willful disobedience...
- 136
High Court
Bombay High Court Allows Appeals by Tenants Against Eviction Orders in Redevelopment Dispute — Held That Tenants Cannot Be Evicted Without Proper Rehabilitation Under MHADA and Cooperative Housing Society Bye-Laws.
2 Sep 2016The judgment pertains to a group of appeals filed by tenants (Pramod Jamnadas Gokani, Upendra Lallubhai Shah, Priti Pramod Gokani, and Kamlesh Jayant ...
- 266
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Cooperative Society's Appeal Against Developer in Property Dispute — Interim Relief Denied Due to Lack of Prima Facie Case and Balance of Convenience. The court held that the society failed to establish a concluded contract as the development agreement was not signed by the developer, and the society had not paid full consideration, making damages an adequate remedy.
17 Dec 2011The appellant, Rachanaa Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd., filed a suit for specific performance of a development agreement against the respondent dev...
- 110
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging State Government's Direction on Non-Occupancy Charges Under Section 79A of Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. The Court Held That Directions Issued Under Section 79A Are Binding on Cooperative Housing Societies and Cannot Be Challenged as Prejudicial to Society's Interest.
5 Oct 2011The petitioners, Matru Ashish Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. and its member Shashikant R. Doshi, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 1s...
- 60
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Expulsion from Cooperative Society. Member's Challenge to Expulsion Order Fails as Court Finds No Violation of Natural Justice and Upholds Minister's Decision Under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.
14 Jan 2010The petitioner, Baliram Hari Patil, was a member of respondent No. 2, Tavase Khurd Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Society Limited, a cooperative socie...
- 34
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Direction to Enroll Members in Co-operative Sugar Society. Section 79 of MCS Act Empowers Sugar Commissioner to Issue Directions for Membership Enrollment Despite Full Share Capital.
17 Jul 2006The petitioners, Rajaram Bapu Patil Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. (a co-operative sugar society) and its director Pandurang Ramrao Patil, filed a writ...
- 260
High Court
Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Trial Court Order Refusing to Strike Out Defence for Non-Payment of Interim Rent Under Section 13(2) of the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. The Court Held That the Provision for Striking Out Defence Is Discretionary and Not Mandatory, and the Trial Court's Discretion Should Not Be Interfered With Unless Perverse.
30 Nov -0001The petitioners, seven cooperative housing societies, filed a writ petition challenging an order of the trial court dated 30th April 2013, which rejec...
- 96
