DIGANT PAREKH (HUF) THRO. ITS KARTA MR. DIGANT PAREKH v. AKRUTI KAILASH CONSTRUCTION
Deemed Membership in Co-operative Societies: Jurisdiction of Registrar, MOFA Agreement, and Effect of Pending Civil Suit.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2026:BHC-AS:1750-DB
Decision Date: 16-01-2026
List of Laws
Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960; Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963; Transfer of Property Act, 1882
- Facts: The petitioners, Digant Parekh (HUF) and Mr. Digant Parekh, sought deemed membership in Hubtown Viva Premises Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. based on a registered agreement for sale executed in 2013. A rectification deed substituted the HUF with Mr. Parekh in his individual capacity. The Society did not respond to their membership application, leading to an application under Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Assistant Registrar granted deemed membership, but the Divisional Joint Registrar set aside this order in revision, citing the pendency of a civil suit filed by the respondents (builders) for enforcement of the sale agreement.
- Procedural Posture: The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the Divisional Joint Registrar's order that overturned the grant of deemed membership.
- Issue: (1) Did the Divisional Joint Registrar lack jurisdiction to entertain the revision application due to a notification transferring powers to the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Slum Rehabilitation Authority, Mumbai)? (2) Are the petitioners persons who have "taken" flats under the MOFA agreement, entitling them to membership? (3) Does the pendency of a civil suit bar the conferment of deemed membership under Section 22(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960?
- Holding: The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the revisional order and restoring the Assistant Registrar's order granting deemed membership.
- Reasoning: The Court held that the notification transferring powers to the Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Slum Rehabilitation Authority) was effective immediately upon issuance, divesting the Divisional Joint Registrar of jurisdiction. The Court distinguished the Supreme Court's ruling in Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust vs. Magnum Developers and Others, emphasizing that the new authority was already legally created by the notification. The Court also found that the petitioners, possessing a registered MOFA agreement in Form No. 5, qualified as persons who had "taken" flats, entitling them to membership. The Court clarified that while authorities under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act should not decide pure questions of title, membership involves a provisional determination. The pendency of a civil suit does not automatically bar membership conferment unless a restraining order is issued by the civil court. The Court emphasized that Section 22(2) empowers the Registrar to decide on membership when the society defaults, subject to the outcome of the civil suit.
🔒 For Members Only