Bombay High Court
VAISHALI SANTOSH SHINDE AND ORSversusTHE DEPUTY REGISTRAR OF COOPERTIVE SOCIETIES CIDCO AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the majority consent to the Development Agreement bars the relief sought.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of 42 members (including one deceased), sought a court order directing the Deputy Registrar to appoint an authorized representative to convene a Special or Emergency General Body Meeting of their cooperative society to discuss delays, defaults, and required disclosures under the Development Agreement and to negotiate redevelopment. The respondents, representing the society, the developer, and the State, informed the court that 91 of the 108 society members had already consented to the Development Agreement, which was executed on 15 July 2024, registered the next day, and a Commencement Certificate was issued on 3 June 2026. The petitioners, identified as non‑co‑operative members, argued for greater transparency and participation in the redevelopment decision. The court observed that while redevelopment decisions require majority approval, the overwhelming consent of the members effectively binds the petitioners to the agreed terms, and the society must cooperate by providing the requested documents. Consequently, the court disposed of the writ petition without ordering the convening of a special meeting.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners can compel the Deputy Registrar to appoint an authorized representative to hold a Special/Emergency General Body Meeting of the cooperative society for discussing the Development Agreement.
- Whether the majority consent of society members to the Development Agreement precludes the petitioners' request for further disclosures and renegotiation.
Subjects
- cooperative society
- development agreement
- special general body meeting
- majority consent
- transparency
- redevelopment
- writ petition
Judgment
NISHA Digitally signed by
NISHA SANDEEP
SANDEEP CHITNIS
Date: 2026.08.29
CHITNIS 16:36:23 +0530 911-wp.11039.2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11039 OF 2026
Vaishali Santosh Shinde and Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative
Societies, CIDCO and Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Aditya Lele with Mr. Bharat Mirchandani, Mr. Talib Kalandan,
Mr. Atul Mishra i/b Mirchandani Advocates & Co. for the Petitioners.
Mr. Tejesh Dande with Mr. Pranav Nimhan and Mr. Tanuj Kabra for
the Respondent No.2.
Mr. Suresh Sabrad with Mr. Jeetenndra Sachhdev, Mr. Amey Sawant,
Ms. Eshwaree Kudalkar, Mr. Vilas Thale, Mr. Prateek Sabrad and
Mr. Avinash Banga i/b JS Legal for the Respondent No.3.
Mr. S. H. Kankal, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 27th AUGUST 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. The petition being filed by 42 petitioners, out of which
one petitioner is informed to be dead seek a direction to the
N. S. Chitnis 1/3
911-wp.11039.2026.doc
respondent No.1. to appoint an authorized representative to conduct a
Special General Body Meeting/Emergency General Body Meeting of
the respondent No.2 Society for discussion on various aspects which
include the discussion on the delay and default in the Development
Agreement as well as the necessary disclosures to be made by the
Developer ensuring transparency in the process with a request for
negotiation of re-development.
3. We have the appearance of the learned counsel on behalf
of the Society as well as the Developer and a statement is made before
us that, out of 108 members of the Society, 91 members have accorded
their consent to the execution of the Development Agreement, which
is done long back in 15th July 2024 and even the Development
Agreement is registered on the next day. We are informed that the
Commencement Certificate is also issued on 3 rd June 2026, pursuant to
which the development has commenced. It is informed that the
present petitioners are the Non-Co-operative members and we could
see from the pleadings in the petition that they want certain
N. S. Chitnis 2/3
911-wp.11039.2026.doc
disclosures. Undisputedly, the decision to be taken to appoint a
Developer for re-development of the Society is a decision to be taken
by a majority but must have consensus of all the members and we
expect the Society to render all necessary co-operation to the
petitioners by furnishing all such documents which the petitioners
seek. However, it must be kept in mind that if the Development
Agreement is agreed to by maximum members of the Society then the
petitioners have no choice then to go ahead with it. However despite
this, we expect co-operation of the Society and the Developer, as we
find that the Developer has addressed communication to the Society
ensuring a particular area to be allotted to each member and we hope
and trust that all these clauses find place in the Development
Agreement.
With these directions, we dispose of the writ petition.
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J. BHARATI DANGRE, J.
N. S. Chitnis 3/3
Checking your session…