Bombay High Court
PANVEL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THR ITS ASSISTANT DIRECTORversusDISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR CO OP AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The order dated 26 September 2025 granting a certificate of deemed conveyance to the society is set aside and the Competent Authority is directed to issue a fresh certificate excluding the 2,173.70 sq m layout road, with the entitlement to that land to be decided by the pending civil suit.
Summary
The High Court examined an order dated 26 September 2025 by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co‑operative Societies granting a certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance of 10,938.63 sq m of land to a co‑operative society, which included 2,173.70 sq m of internal layout road. The petitioners – land owners and Panvel Municipal Corporation – contended that the layout road should be transferred to the municipal corporation under conditions in the 2014 and 2022 development permissions and the Unified Development Control and Promotion Regulations. The society had already transferred the road to the corporation, but the court held that the Competent Authority, a limited‑jurisdiction tribunal, could not decide the substantive entitlement to the road, which is pending before a civil court. Consequently, the certificate of deemed conveyance was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh certificate excluding the layout road, with the road’s ownership to be determined by the pending suit. The petitions were partly allowed and disposed of without costs.
Issues considered
- Whether the Competent Authority can issue a certificate of deemed conveyance covering the internal layout road.
- Whether the layout road must be handed over to Panvel Municipal Corporation under the development permission conditions and UDCPR.
- Whether the pending civil suit determines the entitlement to the layout road, thereby affecting the certificate.
- Whether the order dated 26 September 2025 granting the certificate of deemed conveyance is valid.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- deemed conveyance
- layout road
- co‑operative societies
- municipal corporation
- jurisdiction
- civil suit
- land transfer
- UDCPR
- Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act
- certificate of conveyance
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:35467
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13446 OF 2025
Mahendra Milapchand Kanungo and ...Petitioners
Ors
V/s.
District Deputy Registrar of Co Op. ...Respondents
Soc. and Ors
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 10023 OF 2026
Panvel Municipal Corporation Through ...Petitioner
its Assistant Director
V/s.
District Deputy Registrar Co Op and ...Respondents
Ors
________________
Mr. Aadil Parsurampuria with Mr. Atul Mishra, Ms. Gita Bhaskaran i/b
Mr. Aditya Lele for Petitioners in WP. 13446/2026 and Respondent Nos. 3 to
6 in WP. 10023/2026.
Mr. Rohit Sakhadeo, for Petitioner in WP No. 10023 of 2026 and
Respondent No. 3 in WP. 13446 of 2025.
Mr. Mahesh Vishwakarma i/b Ms. Megha Jain for Respondent No. 2
(society) in both the Petitions.
Mr. Aditya Udeshi with Mr. Rahul Sanghvi i/b Ms. Sanjay Udeshi and Co.
for Respondent No. 4 in WP. 13446/2025 and Respondent No. 7 in WP.
10023/2026.
Mrs. Vaishali S. Nimbalkar, AGP for Respondent-State in WP.
13446/2025.
Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent-State in WP. 10023/2026.
Mr. Vinayak Vasant Salaskar-Chairman present.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 28 AUGUST 2026.
Page No.1 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
P.C.:
1) The challenge in the present Petition is to the order dated
26 September 2025 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operative
Societies, Raigad-Alibuag and Competent Authority (Competent
Authority) granting certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance of land
admeasuring 10938.63 Sq. Mtrs in favour of Respondent No. 2-society.
Petitions are filed by the land owners and by Panvel Municipal
Corporation challenging the order of deemed conveyance to the limited
extent of conveying the layout road to the Respondent No. 2-society.
2) I have heard Mr. Parsurampuria, the learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioners in WP. No. 13446/2025 and Respondent
Nos. 3 to 6 in WP. No. 10023/2026., Mr. Sakhadeo, the learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioner in WP No. 10023 of 2026 and Respondent
No. 3 in WP. No. 13446 of 2025, Mr. Vishwakarma, the learned counsel
appearing for Respondent No. 2 (society) in both the Petitions, Mr.
Udeshi, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 in WP. No.
13446/2025 and Respondent No. 7 in WP. No. 10023/2026, Mrs
Nimbalkar, the learned AGP appearing for Respondent-State in WP. No.
10023/2026 and Mr. Sawant, the learned AGP appearing for Respondent-
State in WP. No. 10023/2026.
3) It appears that the total land owned by the land owners
admeasured 17,330 Sq. Mtrs. The land owners granted development
rights in favour of the developer only in respect of land admeasuring
10938.63 Sq. Mtrs. The developer accordingly took up land admeasuring
Page No.2 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
10938.63 Sq. Mtrs for development in respect of which, the first
development permission dated 7 July 2014 was issued by the then
planning authority i.e. Collector. In the development permission,
following condition was incorporated:-
२५ भविष्यात या सोबतच्या मंजूर रेखांकनामध्ये दरु ु स्ती करून, सुधारित रेखांकनास मजुरी
घ्यावयाची झाल्यास, सोबतच्या रेखांकनात दर्शविलेले रस्ते जर लगतच्या भूखंडांना जोडले असतील
तर ते सुधारित रेखांकनात त्याचप्रमाणे अबाधित ठे वण्यात यावेत.
4) The land owners decided to develop the land retained by
them and a revised development permission for construction of Building
Nos. 8 and 9 was issued on 6 May 2022. In the revised permission so
issued, a specific condition was imposed at Sr. No. 48 which reads thus:-
48. The Owner / Developer Should Transfer area under Proposed / Layout /
Internal Roads to the name of Panvel Municipal Corporation within one month
from issue of this certificate.
5) Thus, both the conditions in the original development plan
as well as revised plan required maintenance and transfer of layout road
to the Municipal Corporation. Prima facie, both the conditions appear to
be in tune with the provisions of Unified Development Control and
Promotion Regulations. Under regulation 3.3.4, while granting
development permission for land subdivision, it is necessary to
coordinate the roads in the adjoining lands. Regulation 3.3.4 provides
thus:-
3.3.4 Co-ordination of Roads in adjoining lands
While granting the development permission for land sub-division or group
housing/ campus planning, it shall be necessary to co-ordinate the roads in the
adjoining lands subject to provisions mentioned in Regulation No.3.3.2.C –
Page No.3 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
Note. Also, proper hierarchy of roads shall be maintained while deciding width
of road.
6) Under Regulation 3.3.11, it is mandatory to handover the
layout roads to the planning authority without payment of composition
Regulation 3.3.11 provides thus:-
3.3.11 Handing Over of Layout Roads
Whenever called upon by the Authority to do so, areas under internal layout
roads shall be handed over to the Planning Authority by way of deed after
development of the same, within such period as may be specified in
commencement letter / development permission, for which no compensation
shall be paid by the Planning Authority.
7) It is the case of the land owners, the developer and Panvel
Municipal Corporation that the layout road sanctioned vide permission
dated 7 July 2014 aligns with the roads in the neighbouring layout plots
and that therefore the same must be handed over to Panvel Municipal
Corporation. It appears that the layout road has been handed over vide
register Deed of transfer dated 18 December 2025 to the Municipal
Corporation.
8) The land owners, developers as well as Panvel Municipal
Corporation have no qualms about conveyance of the layout land in
favour of the Respondent No. 2-society. Their only reservation is about
conveyance of land covered by the internal roads admeasuring 2173.70
Sq. Mtrs, which is incorporated in the impugned certificate of deemed
conveyance.
Page No.4 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
9) It appears that the Respondent No. 2-society has already
instituted Special Civil Suit No. 419 of 2024 (later renumbered as RCS
No. 45/2025) before the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, in which it
has sought following prayers:-
a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement and
Order that the Indemnity Bond dated 29.05.2024 executed by Defendant No. 3
to 7 having registered document no. PVL3-10377-2024 filed below Exhibit- "C"
is null and void ab-initio, and not binding on the Plaintiff society;
b) This Hon'ble Court further be pleased to direct the Defendants to execute
necessary deed of cancellation and thereby cancel the said Indemnity Bond
dated 29.05.2024 having registered document no. PVL3-10377-2024 filed below
Exhibit- "C".
c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement and
Order that the suit property, being the internal road of the Plaintiff Society is
for the exclusive use of the Plaintiff Society and its members, and that no other
party, including the Defendants, has any right, title, or interest over the said
internal road.
d) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a Judgement and Order of
permanent injunction restraining Defendant No. 1 & 2 from demolishing,
removing, or in any manner interfering with any structures, including gates,
fences, or security installations, erected or installed by the Plaintiff society for
security purposes on the suit property, the internal road in question.
e) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement and
Order that the notices dated 21.05.2024 and 26.07.2024 a/w 20.08.2024 and
03.09.204 filed below Exhibit-"R-Colly" herein are illegal, arbitrary and without
any legal foundation; and thereafter this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set aside
the same.
f) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased grant ad-interim and interim reliefs in
terms of prayer clause (c), and (d), pending the final disposal of the suit;
g) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to draw a decree in terms of the reliefs as
prayed herein above and thereafter this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the
Sub-Registrar Panvel -3 to register the Decree so drawn by this Hon'ble Court.
h) Award costs of the suit to the Plaintiff.
Page No.5 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
10) The Application filed by Respondent No. 2-society for
seeking temporary injunction in Regular Civil Suit No. 45 of 2025 has
been rejected by the Trial Court by order dated 9 April 2025. It appears
that Respondent No. 2-society has filed an Appeal against order dated 9
April 2025 which is pending.
11) Thus whether Panvel Municipal Corporation is entitled to
ownership in respect of the layout road is an issue directly subjudice in
the pending Suit. As of now, the land owners and developers have
handed over the layout road to the Municipal Corporation in accordance
with the above quoted conditions in the development permission and in
accordance with the above quoted provisions of the UDCPR. Whether
that transfer deed is valid or not can be decided by the Civil Court.
12) The Competent Authority is a tribunal of limited
jurisdiction. While conducting a summary inquiry under provisions of
Sections 11 (3) and (4) of the The Maharashtra Ownership Flats
(Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and
Transfer) Act, 1963, Competent Authority cannot decide complicated
questions of entitlement of Panvel Municipal Corporation to own the
land covered by the layout road. It cannot decide whether the indemnity
bond executed for transfer of road to the Panvel Municipal Corporation
or the Deed of Transfer are valid or otherwise. Only Civil Court case
decide those issues. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider the ratio of
the judgments of the Apex Court in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust V/s
State of Maharashtra and Ors.1 and PT. Chet Ram Vashist (Dead) By
1 (2020) 9 SCC 356
Page No.6 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
LRs. V/s Municipal Corporation of Delhi2 relied upon by Respondent No.
2-society which deal with the aspect of reservation not amounting to
vesting of land in favour of the planning authority. That issue can be
considered by the Civil Court.
13) In my view, therefore the land covered by the layout road is
required to be excluded from the certificate issued by the Competent
Authority at this juncture. If and when Respondent No. 2-society
succeeds in the suit and secures a declaration that it alone is entitled to
exclusively use the land covered by layout road, conveyance of that land
can always to be granted in favour of the Respondent No. 2-society. The
Respondent No. 2-society can accordingly incorporate challenge to the
deed of transfer dated 18 December 2025 as well as seek a prayer for
conveyance of land admeasuring 2173.70 Sq. Mtrs in the pending suit. It
is well settled principle that mere issuance of certificate of deemed
conveyance land does not amount to final determination of rights and
entitlements of parties qua the conveyed land (SEE: Arunkumar H. Shah
HUF V/s. Avon Arcade Premises Co-operative Society Ltd and Ors. 3)
The Respondent No. 2-society can always seek conveyance of layout road
from the Civil Court if it can establish that handing over/transfer of the
road to Panvel Municipal Corporation is illegal. As of now the land
covered by the layout road needs to be deleted from conveyance of
Respondent No. 2-society leaving open liberty for it to seek conveyance
thereof from the Civil Court.
2 1995 1 SCC 47
3 (2025) 7 SCC 249
Page No.7 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
14) In view, of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following
order:-
(i) Order dated 26 September 2025 passed by the
Competent Authority is set aside.
(ii) The Application is remanded to the Competent
Authority for issuance of fresh certificate of deemed
conveyance by excluding land admeasuring 2173.70 Sq.
Mtrs. covered by layout road from the certificate of
deemed conveyance.
(iii) The Competent Authority shall issue fresh certificate
of deemed conveyance concerning only the balance
portion of land.
(iv) It is clarified that entitlement of the Respondent No.
2-society to seek ownership in respect of land
admeasuring 2173.70 Sq. Mtrs shall be subject to final
outcome of the pending suit.
(v) All rights and Contentions qua the layout road are
kept open to be decided in the Suit. The Suit shall be
decided uninfluenced by observations made in the order.
(vi) The Competent Authority shall proceed to issue fresh
certificate of deemed conveyance as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of four months.
Page No.8 of 9
28 August 2026
Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx
(vii) Parties shall appear before Competent Authority on 7
September 2026 and it shall not be necessary to issue
fresh notices in the remanded proceedings.
15) With the above directions, both the Petitions are partly allowed
and disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: Renuka S Thakur
Page No.9 of 9
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 28 August 2026
Date: 29/08/2026 17:33:04
Checking your session…