Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963

The promoter, Nahalchand Laloochand Pvt. Ltd., developed a building and sold flats to members of Panchali Co‑operative Housing Society Ltd., asserting a right to sell 25 stilt parking spaces as separate units. The society contended that the promoter could not sell those spaces because they were not "flats" under the Ma…

Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) entered into a development agreement with Mr. Nusli Neville Wadia (respondent No.3), who later terminated the agreement and sought certified copies of the development plans, layouts and related documents filed with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under the Right to Inform…

The appellant, Arun H Shah HUF, challenged an ex parte certificate of deemed conveyance issued by the competent authority under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, which granted the first respondent cooperative society title to the entire larger plot subject to a condition that it execute a permanent lea…

The appellant, a co‑operative housing society, booked flats from the respondent builder in 1993 and took possession in 1997, but the builder never obtained the required occupancy certificate. Because of this omission, the flat owners had to pay substantially higher property tax and water charges and could not obtain re…

Jayantilal Investments, a promoter, was sued by MadhuVihar Co‑operative Housing Society for conveyance of title and an injunction restraining further construction on a plot in Kandivali. The Society argued that under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) the promoter must obtain flat‑takers' consent for any additi…

The Cosmos Co. Operative Bank Ltd. (appellant) challenged a High Court order that held Central Bank of India (respondent No.1) had the first charge over a flat mortgaged by the original borrowers. Both banks had received security documents: the appellant bank held the share certificate of ownership, while the responden…

The appellants, home buyers, filed suits against the builder and Axis Bank seeking specific performance, possession and other reliefs concerning flats in the Orbit Heaven project. Axis Bank moved a notice of motion under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC to have the plaint rejected only against it, invoking the bar under S…