Bombay High Court
VALLEY TOWER COOPERTIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTDversusDISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR COOPERTIVE ANDORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Partly Allowed
- Bench
- SANDEEP V MARNE
Holding
The orders of the Competent Authority are set aside and the applications are remanded for fresh determination applying the principle of land division proportionate to the built‑up area.
Summary
The petitioners, three co‑operative housing societies, challenged orders of the District Deputy Registrar (Competent Authority) that granted them deemed conveyance of land amounts they alleged were insufficient. They contended that the land should be divided among the societies in proportion to the built‑up area (BUA) actually utilized in each building, whereas the Competent Authority relied on an architect’s certificate that allocated land based on covenants under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act. The developer argued that the total land of 9,840 sq.m. should be shared equally among the societies and a bungalow, without regard to BUA. The Court examined the certificates and found that the division was not based on BUA and therefore erroneous. Consequently, the Court set aside the orders dated 23 March 2021, 20 April 2022 and 31 December 2025 and remanded the applications for fresh determination applying the principle of proportionate division based on BUA, in line with the Government Resolution of 22 June 2018. The petitions were partly allowed and disposed of, with directions for the parties to appear before the Competent Authority for further proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the Competent Authority correctly applied the principle of land division for deemed conveyance of co‑operative society lands.
- Whether land allocation must be proportionate to the built‑up area utilized in each building under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act.
- Whether the orders of the Competent Authority should be set aside and the applications remanded for fresh enquiry.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- co‑operative housing society
- deemed conveyance
- land division
- built‑up area
- MOFA
- competent authority
- architect certificate
- remand
- proportionate allocation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AS:27988
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5469 OF 2024
Valley Tower Annex Co-operative
Housing Society Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
District Deputy Registrar Co-operative
Society and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.5762 OF 2026
Valley Tower Co-operative Housing
Society Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
District Deputy Registrar Co-operative
Society and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.9550 OF 2022
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.17219 OF 2022
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.9550 OF 2022
Valley Tower C Wing Co-operative
Housing Society Ltd. ...Petitioner
V/s.
District Deputy Registrar Co-operative
Society and Ors. ...Respondents
________________
Mr. Girish Rao with Mr. Rakesh Gupte i/b. M/s. Lex Consultants for the
Petitioner in WP/5469/2024 and WP/5762/2026.
Page No.1 of 6
7 July 2026
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
Mr. Mithil V. Sampat for the Petitioner in WP/9550/2022.
Ms. S.D. Chipade, AGP for Respondent-State in WP/5469/2024.
Ms. Savina Crasto, AGP for Respondent-State in WP/5762/2026.
Mr. P.V. Nelson-Rajan, AGP for Respondent-State in WP/9550/2022.
Mr. Kailas S. Dewal with Mr. Yash Dewal and Mr. Ashwin Kulkarni for
Respondent No.2 in WP/5469/2024 & WP/5762/2026 and for Respondent
No.3 in WP/9550/2022.
Mr. Vinayak Joshi, secretary of Respondent No.5-Society in
WP/5469/2024 and WP/5762/2026, is present.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 7 JULY 2026.
P.C.:
1) By these Petitions, the Petitioner-Societies have challenged
orders passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies,
Thane & Competent Authority (Competent Authority) granting deemed
conveyance of various lands in their favour. The Petitioner-Societies are
aggrieved by the area of lands conveyed to them.
2) The grouse of the Petitioner-Societies is that the division of the
land in the layout is not done by the Competent Authority proportionate
to the built up area utilised in construction of each of the buildings.
Accordingly, Writ Petition No.9550 of 2022 is Cled by the Petitioner-
Valley Tower C Wing Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. challenging
order dated 23 March 2021 passed by the Competent Authority, by which
land admeasuring 3578 sq.mtrs. is conveyed when in fact, the Petitioner-
Page No.2 of 6
7 July 2026
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
Society claims land admeasuring 6312.37 sq.mtrs. Similarly, Writ Petition
No.5469 of 2024 is Cled by Petitioner-Valley Tower Annex Co-operative
Housing Society Ltd. challenging order of the Competent Authority
dated 20 April 2022, by which land admeasuring 3564 sq.mtrs. is
conveyed when in fact, the Petitioner-Society claims land admeasuring
4667.20 sq.mtrs. Writ Petition No.5762 of 2026 is Cled by Petitioner-
Valley Tower Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. challenging order dated
31 December 2025 passed by the Competent Authority, by which land
admeasuring 2481 sq.mtrs. is conveyed when in fact the Petitioner-
Society claims land admeasuring 3548 sq.mtrs.
3) I have heard Mr. Rao and Mr. Sampat, the learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioner-Societies in the respective Petitions, Mr.
Dewal, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent-Developer and the
learned AGPs for Respondents-State and have considered the
submissions canvassed by them. I have also perused the records of the
case Cled alongwith the Petitions and have gone through the orders
passed by the Competent Authority in the respective Petitions.
4) Perusal of the orders passed by the Competent Authority would
indicate that it has mainly relied on certiCcate of architect dated 29
January 2021 issued by M/s. Thakkar & Associates, the Architect of the
Developer. However, on perusal of the said Architect’s certiCcate dated
29 January 2021, it appears that the land division proportionate to the
Built Up Area(BUA) utilised in construction of each building has not
been done by that Architect. It appears that the Architect has mainly
gone by the covenants of the Agreements executed under Section 4 of
Page No.3 of 6
7 July 2026
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of
Construction, Sale, Management, and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA) under
which the land admeasuring 9840 sq.mtrs. was allocated for residential
development. It is the contention of the Developer that all the three
Societies and one bungalow must share only land admeasuring 9840
sq.mtrs. amongst them.
5) On the other hand, it is the contention of the Petitioner-Societies
that FSI Gowing out of the entire larger land has been utilised for
construction of the various buildings and therefore land division must
occur on the basis of proportionate distribution qua utilised BUA for
construction of each of the buildings. Petitioners have accordingly relied
upon certiCcate issued by their own Architect -Mr. Mukund Bhat and
have claimed that upon application of principle of division of land
proportionate to BUA utilised in each of the buildings, their land
entitlement would be the one which is claimed by them and which has
been indicated above.
6) The orders of the Competent Authority are based on certiCcate
issued by the Developer’s Architect dated 29 January 2021, which did not
indicate proportionate division of land based on BUA utilised for
construction of each of the buildings. In that view of the matter, the area
of the land conveyed in favour of each of the Societies appears to be
erroneous. Therefore, the applications Cled by the Petitioner- Societies
need to be remanded for fresh enquiry.
7) I accordingly, proceed to pass the following order:-
Page No.4 of 6
7 July 2026
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
(i) Orders dated 23 March 2021, 20 April 2022 and 31
December 2025 passed by the Competent Authority are
set aside.
(ii) Applications Cled by the Petitioner-Societies for deemed
conveyance are restored on the Cle of the Competent
Authority, who shall proceed to decide the same afresh
by applying the principle of land division proportionate
to BUA utilised in construction of each of the buildings
and by keeping in mind the procedure prescribed in the
Government Resolution dated 22 June 2018.
(iii) In order to enable the Competent Authority to undertake
the exercise of division of land proportionate to BUA
utilised in each of the buildings, both the sides would be
entitled to rely upon the certiCcate issued by their own
Architect. The Architects of the parties must however,
indicate land division in respect of each building
proportionate to BUA utilised in construction of each of
the buildings.
(iv) In the event of any ambiguity, the Competent Authority
would be at liberty to appoint Architect(s) from its own
panel for the purpose of securing the Cgure of land
division.
Page No.5 of 6
7 July 2026
Megha 16_wp_5469_2024
(v) All rights and contentions of the parties on merits are
expressly kept open and the Competent Authority shall
not be inGuenced by any of the observations made in the
order while deciding the remanded applications.
(vi) Parties shall appear before the Competent Authority on
15 July 2026 alongwith copy of this order downloaded
from the website of this Court and seek further
directions for Cxation of dates of hearing in the
remanded applications.
8) With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are partly allowed
and disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
9) In view of disposal of the Petitions, nothing survives to be
adjudicated in the Interim Application and the same is accordingly
disposed of.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Signed by: Megha S. Parab
Page No.6 of 6
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge 7 July 2026
Date: 09/07/2026 10:41:50
Checking your session…