The Bombay High Court recently issued several significant rulings concerning the deemed conveyance of properties and related disputes under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management, and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA). These rulings clarify the jurisdictional limits of the Competent Authority and address issues related to property ownership and conveyance processes.
Dismissal of Writ Petition in Deemed Conveyance Dispute
In the case of Rajesh Dulichand Borkar vs. the State of Maharashtra & Ors., the Bombay High Court, presided by Justice Madhav Jamdar, dismissed a writ petition challenging an order granting deemed conveyance to a society for a plot of land, CTS No. 701, re-numbered as CTS No. 658/2D. The petitioner argued that the land should not be part of the deemed conveyance granted to the society. However, the court noted that the earlier deemed conveyance order, which included CTS Nos. 705, 706, 707, and 701, was set aside only concerning CTS No. 705. Thus, the writ petition was deemed an abuse of process, leading to its dismissal with a cost of Rs. 10,000.
Jurisdictional Limits on Competent Authority in Conveyance Issues
Another ruling by Justice Avinash Gharote in the case of Shashikala Anil Patil vs. Competent Authority And District Deputy Registrar Co-operative Societies, Thane And Ors. clarified the jurisdictional limits of the Competent Authority under MOFA. The petitioner challenged an order for deemed conveyance, arguing that her rights as a co-owner under a development agreement with the promoter were not fully addressed. The court held that the Competent Authority is not empowered to adjudicate disputes regarding the entitlement of co-owners vis-a-vis promoters. Such matters should be resolved in civil courts. The court also addressed allegations of fraud, noting the improper disclosure by the respondent in filing a new application for deemed conveyance without mentioning previous proceedings.
Court Receiver’s Custody and Deemed Conveyance
In the matter of Gabriel Apartment Co-op Hsg Ltd. vs. District Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies, Justice Avinash Gharote ruled on the issue of deemed conveyance where a property was under the custody of a Court Receiver. The court upheld the rejection of an application for deemed conveyance, noting that the property was still under the Court Receiver’s custody, and the title dispute had not been resolved. The petitioner was granted liberty to reapply for deemed conveyance once the title issue was settled.
These rulings provide critical guidance on the handling of deemed conveyance applications and highlight the importance of resolving ownership disputes before such conveyances can be processed.