Quick Summary: In a case involving people who bought apartments and a redevelopment project, the Bombay High Court ruled against the buyers. The court said they can't make demands on the housing society because their agreements were with a developer whose contract was canceled.
This dispute involves Mr. Satish and Mrs. Swapna Inamdar, who bought apartments in a redevelopment project. They were up against Mr. Amogh Sawant, the developer, and the Nehru Nagar Vidyut Vilas Co-operative Housing Society, among others. The Inamdars wanted the court to stop any construction or changes to the building plans without their approval.
The Inamdars, the people who appealed, wanted the court to prevent the society and the new developer from doing any construction or selling apartments without their permission. They believed they had rights because they bought apartments from the previous developer.
Judge Kamal Khata ruled against the Inamdars. The court said that since the developer's contract was canceled, the Inamdars couldn't claim any rights against the housing society or the new developer. The court emphasized that the society's main job is to provide housing for its members, not for people who bought from a previous developer.
"The consistent view of this Court is that purchasers claiming through a terminated developer cannot assert or enforce any rights against the Society or the newly appointed developer."
The court referred to previous cases, like Vaidehi Akash Housing and Goregaon Pearl, which set the rule that buyers can't enforce rights if the developer's agreement is ended. The court said these buyers should seek solutions against the developer, not the society.
The court decided that the Inamdars could not enforce any rights against the housing society or the new developer because their agreement was with a developer whose contract was terminated. The court suggested that their issues should be directed towards the developer instead.
