Bombay HC: Deputy Registrar Overstepped in Petit Mansion Membership Dispute

Summary: In a recent decision, the Bombay High Court overturned orders related to a membership and ownership disagreement in the Petit Mansion Cooperative Housing Society in Mumbai. The court found that the Deputy Registrar went beyond their authority by deciding on ownership issues that should be handled in a civil court.

Background of the Case

The case is about the Petit Mansion C-Wing Cooperative Housing Society in Mumbai. The disagreement began when members of the society challenged the inclusion of certain individuals as members, based on a 4% share in a shop located within the society.

Key Dates and Events

• July 19, 1998: Mr. Dady Sorabjee Major became a member of the society.
• January 20, 2000: Mr. Rahul Deshpande bought Shop No. C/S/06.
• August 25, 2014: Agreement terms were filed about a 4% share in the shop.
• October 4, 2016: A deed was completed for the 4% share.

What Started the Dispute?

The disagreement started when the society refused to recognize Ms. Priya Menon, Mr. Arjun Nair, Ms. Kavita Iyer, and Mr. Sunil Rao as members, arguing they didn't have the right documents. The Deputy Registrar had told the society to send maintenance bills in their names, which the society disagreed with.

The Court's Analysis

Judge Amit Borkar pointed out that the Deputy Registrar cannot decide ownership issues under Section 154B-27 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act. This section is meant for making sure existing duties are followed, not solving disputes.

"The Registrar’s role under this section is limited to ensuring compliance with duties already fixed by law," the court noted.

Why the Orders Were Overturned

The court found that the Deputy Registrar had effectively decided on ownership by telling the society to issue maintenance bills to Ms. Priya Menon, Mr. Arjun Nair, Ms. Kavita Iyer, and Mr. Sunil Rao. This was beyond the Registrar's powers, as it involved deciding on rights and responsibilities that need a civil court's intervention.

Summary of the Verdict

The court overturned the orders and notices, allowing the parties to seek resolution in the appropriate civil court. The decision emphasizes the importance of jurisdiction and keeping separate the roles of deciding and enforcing.

This case serves as a reminder that cooperative societies must follow legal processes and that disagreements over membership and ownership should be resolved through proper legal channels.

Disclaimer: The names used in this report are fictitious and have been added for privacy reasons.