SAKSHIGANDHA WING A CO OP SOC LTD.versusPRITHVIRAJSHIRI ASSOCIATION AND ORS

Renuka Thakur                                                     31-WP-8558-2023.docx


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 8558 OF 2023
Sakshigandha Wing A Co Op Soc Ltd.                           ...Petitioner
                    V/s.

Prithvirajshiri Association and Ors                         ...Respondents
                              ________________
Mr. Balasaheb G. Ligade for Petitioner.
Mr. Shailendra S. Kanetkar a/w Mr. P. Kothari for Respondent No. 1.
                                 ________________
                                          CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
                                           DATED: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026.


P.C.:


1)              The Petitioner challenges order dated 18 October 2022
passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pune
City Pune and Competent Authority (District Deputy Registrar)
allowing Application No. 6 of 2022 filed by the Petitioner-society but
granting deemed conveyance of land admeasuring only 635.72 Sq. Mtrs
out of total land admeasuring 1100 Sq. Mtrs in favour of the Petitioner-
society.    Petitioner-society   had      prayed      for    conveyance      of   land
admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs. However,                 since conveyance of land
admeasuring only 635.72 Sq. Mtrs is granted, the Petitioner has filed the
present Petition.




                                     Page No.1 of 5
                                  28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Renuka Thakur                                            31-WP-8558-2023.docx


2)              I have heard Mr. Ligade, the learned counsel appearing for
the Petitioner and Mr. Kanetkar, the learned counsel appearing for
Respondent No. 1.


3)              Despite being duly served, none has appeared on behalf of
the Respondents Nos. 2 and 3, who are the original land owners and for
whose benefit certain portion of the land was claimed to have been
carved out.


4)              It appears that in the original development agreement dated
20 December 2014, land admeasuring 236 Sq. Mtrs was apparently carved
out for bungalow structure of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and building was
to be constructed on the balance portion of land. Respondent No. 1 was
the developer in whose favour development agreement dated 20
December 2014 was executed. Respondent No. 1 accordingly submitted
plans for construction of the building. In the plan approved by the
planning authority in the year 2015, gross plot area of 1100 Sq. Mtrs was
considered from which area admeasuring 26.30 Sq. Mtrs was deducted
for road acquisition leaving net plot area as 1073.70 Sq. Mtrs. On the net
plot area, 0.9 FSI was sanctioned and after adding transferrable
development rights, the total builtup area sanctioned for the plot was
1414.99 Sq. Mtrs. Respondent No. 1-developer distributed the total
available BUA of 1414.99 Sq. Mtrs into 1130.25 Sq. Mtrs for construction
of building of Petitioner-society and BUA of 250.91 Sq. Mtrs for the
existing Banglow. The balance BUA of 33.83 Sq. Mtrs apparently
remained unconsumed.



                                    Page No.2 of 5
                                 28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Renuka Thakur                                               31-WP-8558-2023.docx


5)              It appears that after sanction of the plan and possibly during
the course of construction of the building, a Deed of Rectification was
executed between Respondent No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 27
March 2017, by which the land meant for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was
apparently increased from 236 Sq. Mtrs to 438 Sq. Mtrs. Prima facie this
action on the part of Respondent No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is
contrary to the provisions of MOFA. Once, the land is subjected to the
provisions of MOFA, the plan is sanctioned and flats are sold, it is
impermissible for land owners and developers to effect any changes in
respect of land entitlement contrary to the plan. In the present case, land
distribution between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 will
have to be in accordance with the sanctioned plan of 2015. The society’s
architect has prepared a certificate dated 9 December 2021 on the basis
of sanctioned plan dated 22 September 2015. The society’s architect
correctly considered the share of Petitioner-society of 1130.25 Sq. Mtrs
in the total sanctioned BUA of 1412.50 Sq. Mtrs. Accordingly, society’s
land entitlement as correctly determined by the architect as 859.15 Sq.
Mtrs.


6)              The Competent Authority has egregiously erred in taking
into consideration the Deed of Rectification dated 27 March 2017 and in
ignoring the proportionate land division made by the architect in this
certificate dated 9 December 2021. The Competent Authority has totally
ignored the provisions of Government Resolution dated 22 June 2018,
which contemplates division of land in the layout proportionate to the
builtup area used in construction of each building.



                                     Page No.3 of 5
                                  28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Renuka Thakur                                               31-WP-8558-2023.docx


7)              In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated
18 October 2022 passed by the Competent Authority is indefensible and
liable to be set aside. The Competent Authority needs to issue a fresh
certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of the Petitioner-
society in respect of land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs. If Respondent
No. 1 or Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are aggrieved by conveyance of land
admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs to Petitioner-society and if they believe
that they are entitled to own some more portion of land, they would
always be at liberty to institute a suit in the Civil Court. By now, it is well
settled possession of law that grant of deemed conveyance is not final
determinative of rights and entitlements of parties in respect of the
conveyed land reference in this regard can be made to the judgment of
the Apex Court in Arunkumar H. Shaha (HUF) V/s Avon Arcade
Premises CHSL1


8)              I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:-


                 (i)    Order dated 18 October 2022 passed by the Competent
                 Authority in Deemed Conveyance Application           No. 6 of
                 2022 is set aside.


                 (ii)   Deemed Conveyance Application No. 6 of 2022 is
                 remanded to the Competent Authority for limited purpose
                 of issuance of fresh certificate of deemed conveyance of
                 land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs in favour of Petitioner-
                 society.

1    (2025) SCC OnLine SC 825

                                     Page No.4 of 5
                                  28 SEPTEMBER 2026
                          Renuka Thakur                                                  31-WP-8558-2023.docx




                                           (iii) Parties shall appear before the Competent Authority

                                           alongwith copy of this order downloaded from website of
                                           this Court on 13 October 2026 and shall apply for fixation
                                           of date(s) of hearing for issuance of fresh certificate in the
                                           remanded proceedings.


                                           (iv) It is specifically clarified that the proceedings are
                                           remanded only for the limited purpose of issuance of fresh
                                           certificate of deemed conveyance by the Competent
                                           Authority land admeasuring of 859.15 Sq. Mtrs and the
                                           Competent Authority shall not entertain any other
                                           objection raised by the parties.


                                           (v) The Competent Authority shall proceed to issue a
                                           fresh certificate of deemed conveyance in favour of the
                                           Petitioner-society as expeditiously as possible, preferably
                                           within a period of four months.


                                           (vi) Once the certificate is issued by the Competent
                                           Authority,   the jurisdictional Sub-registrar of Assurance
                                           shall proceed to register the same.


                          9)              With the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed and
                          disposed of.


                                                                                [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]

Signed by: Renuka S Thakur
                                                               Page No.5 of 5
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge                         28 SEPTEMBER 2026
Date: 01/10/2026 10:40:54