Summary: The Bombay High Court rejected requests from flat buyers who wanted to claim rights in a redevelopment project after the original builder's agreement was canceled. The court said the buyers have no legal rights against the housing society or the new builder.
In this case, Mr. Satish and Mrs. Swapna Inamdar, retired people from Mumbai, appealed against Mr. Amogh Sawant, the owner of M/s. Amogh Sawant and M/s. Adit Enterprises, and others. The Inamdars, who bought flats from a third party, challenged the redevelopment project started by the Nehru Nagar Vidyut Vilas Co-operative Housing Society.
The Inamdars wanted a temporary court order to stop Mr. Amogh Sawant and the housing society from tearing down or building anything without their approval. They also wanted to stop any changes to the building plans and the sale of flats in the new building. However, the lower court rejected these requests, leading to the current appeal.
The Inamdars argued that the housing society should be seen as a "builder" under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA) because it signed a development deal with the original builder. They believed this gave them certain rights over the property.
"The Society qualifies as a ‘Builder’ within the meaning of MOFA," argued the Inamdars.
The court looked at past decisions, including Vaidehi Akash Housing and Goregaon Pearl, which showed that people who buy flats from a third party have no rights against the society once the builder's agreement is canceled. These cases made it clear that societies are not responsible as builders to third-party buyers.
Justice Kamal Khata decided that the Inamdars have no legal rights against the society or Mr. Amogh Sawant. The court stressed that the rights of society members to have permanent housing are more important than third-party claims.
"The consistent view is that buyers claiming through a canceled developer cannot assert or enforce any rights against the Society," the court noted.
The appeals were rejected, and the court refused to give temporary protection for the Inamdars. This decision highlights the legal difficulties faced by flat buyers in redevelopment projects and the importance of understanding what happens when a developer's agreement is canceled.
