Facts: Kartik Regency Coop. Housing Society Ltd. sought Deemed Conveyance under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), 1963. The District Deputy Registrar rejected their application. The petitioner society was formed by 16 out of 28 flat owners. The respondents, the original builders, had sold the majority of flats before obtaining the Occupation Certificate and allegedly exhausted the permissible Floor Space Index (FSI). The builders also allegedly relied on minutes of a meeting where flat purchasers purportedly consented to further construction on adjacent land.
Procedural Posture: The petitioner, Kartik Regency Coop. Housing Society Ltd., filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India in the Bombay High Court, challenging the order of the District Deputy Registrar rejecting their application for Deemed Conveyance.
Issue: Did the District Deputy Registrar err in rejecting the petitioner's application for Deemed Conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA? Specifically, did the Authority exceed its jurisdiction by considering documents beyond the Section 4 Agreements and Architect's Certificate? Can the promoter rely on subsequent informal meetings and NOCs to defeat the statutory right to conveyance? Does the pendency of an appeal challenging the society's registration invalidate its claim for Deemed Conveyance?
Holding: Yes, the Bombay High Court held that the District Deputy Registrar erred in rejecting the application for Deemed Conveyance. The Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order.
Reasoning: The Court reasoned that Section 11 of MOFA provides a remedy for flat purchasers when the promoter fails to execute conveyance. The Competent Authority's inquiry is limited to verifying basic statutory conditions, including the existence of Section 4 Agreements, identification of the property, and failure of the promoter to execute conveyance. While the Authority can consider relevant documents beyond the Agreements and Architect's Certificate, it cannot convert the summary proceeding into a full-scale trial of title. The Court found that the Agreements, Commencement Certificate, and Occupation Certificate clearly identified the property. The alleged minutes of the meeting did not constitute a clear and conscious surrender of the flat purchasers' right to conveyance. The pendency of an appeal challenging the society's registration does not render the society non-existent for the purpose of seeking Deemed Conveyance. The Court directed the District Deputy Registrar to pass a fresh order granting Deemed Conveyance to the petitioner society.