Quick Summary: In a recent Bombay High Court decision dated December 10, 2025, Judge Milind N. Jadhav ruled in favor of Erle Benedict Pereira, granting him rights to extra building space related to an apartment in Bandra, Mumbai. The case revolved around a 1994 agreement, disputed rights, and redevelopment plans.
Who’s Involved?
The case was between Erle Benedict Pereira (the person suing) and Erlyn Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (the group being sued).
What’s the Issue?
The dispute centered around the right to extra building space from a 1994 agreement. Pereira claimed rights to 900 sq. ft. of this space for his apartment, which the society challenged.
The Agreement:
On September 27, 1994, an agreement was made between Mr. ABJ Pereira (Erle's predecessor) and the housing society. It stated that any extra building space would allow Pereira to cover an open terrace next to his apartment.
Society’s Stand:
The society argued that under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), all rights were transferred to them, canceling Pereira's claim.
Pereira’s Argument:
Mr. Tamboly, the lawyer for Pereira, argued that the agreement’s terms were valid and had not been questioned for years. He emphasized that the society initially agreed to these terms.
Society’s Counter:
Mr. Wassoodew, the lawyer for the society, argued that the Maharashtra law ended Pereira’s rights after the agreement. He also claimed the terrace was a shared area, not just for Pereira.
Judge’s Findings:
Judge Jadhav found that the society’s actions—changing decisions and ignoring the agreement—were dishonest. The court upheld Pereira’s rights to the 900 sq. ft. of building space and four parking spaces.
Resolution Details:
The judgment noted the society’s initial acceptance of Pereira’s rights in a 2024 decision, which they later changed without following proper steps.
Outcome:
The court granted temporary relief to Pereira, stopping the society from moving forward with redevelopment plans without acknowledging his rights.
Impact:
This decision reinforces the importance of honoring original agreements and highlights the legal complexities in property redevelopment.
