Site icon Saptakala Real Estate Law Journal

Bombay HC Rules Maintenance Charges Must Be Proportionate to Apartment Size

Airbnb

The Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 9179 of 2022 (Sachin Malpani vs Nilam Patil & Ors.) delivered a significant ruling on maintenance charges for common areas under the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (MAO Act), impacting condominiums across Maharashtra. The judgment clarifies whether maintenance charges should be levied equally on all members or proportionate to the undivided share of their apartment.

Background of the Case

The case arose from a dispute in a condominium where the General Body had resolved to levy equal maintenance charges on all apartment owners, regardless of apartment size, while contributions to the sinking fund varied as per undivided share.

The Petitioners escalated the matter to the Bombay High Court, challenging the proportional charging mechanism.

Key Provisions of MAO Act Referenced

The Deed of Declaration, which forms the legal basis for the condominium, also granted voting rights proportionate to apartment area, aligning with the MAO Act’s intent.

Bombay High Court’s Observations and Ruling

  1. Maintenance Charges Must Be Proportionate:

    • Owners of larger apartments must contribute more to common area maintenance, as undivided interest runs with the apartment.

    • Equal charging resolutions cannot override statutory provisions of the MAO Act.

  2. Past Inequality Cannot Continue:

    • Petitioners had benefited from equal charges earlier.

    • They cannot now resist implementation of the MAO Act.

  3. Deed of Declaration is Binding:

    • Maintenance and voting rights are linked to proportionate area/value.

    • Any contrary resolution does not override statutory rights and obligations.

  4. Rejection of Petitioners’ Argument:

    • Claim that larger flats don’t get extra benefit was dismissed.

    • Common expenses must follow undivided share to ensure fairness and legality.

  5. Distinction Between MOFA and MAO Act:

    • The Court highlighted a clear difference between Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), 1963 and MAO Act, 1970, especially in levy of maintenance charges.

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling provides clarity for condominiums and apartment owners in Maharashtra:

The decision ensures legal compliance, financial equity among apartment owners, and upholds the statutory intent of the MAO Act.

Exit mobile version