Bombay High Court Dismisses Nusli Wadia, Raheja Challenge to Deemed Conveyance of Malad Land to IJMIMA Society

The Bombay High Court has dismissed three writ petitions filed by industrialist Nusli Neville Wadia, in his capacity as Administrator of the Estate of Late E.F. Dinshaw, along with Radhakrishna Properties Pvt. Ltd. and Ivory Properties and Hotels Pvt. Ltd.

The petitions challenged an order dated August 29, 2022 granting unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of the Ijimima Imitation Jewellery Market Co-operative Society.

Justice Amit Borkar upheld the order passed by the District Deputy Registrar under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 (MOFA).

The dispute concerns land admeasuring 16,747.19 square metres together with 2,955.39 square metres of recreational ground area. The land forms part of the Raheja Metroplex layout in Malad.

The sanctioned layout contemplated ten buildings. Only Building No. 4 was constructed. The society was registered in May 27, 2009.

On December 24, 2021, the society called upon the promoters to execute the conveyance. When this did not materialise, it moved the District Deputy Registrar on 13 April 2022 seeking unilateral deemed conveyance. The Competent Authority granted the request by an order dated 29 August 2022.

In the High Court, the petitioners maintained that the agreements provided only for leasehold rights. They argued that conveyance could take place only after the entire layout was completed. They also questioned the service of notice, pointed to procedural irregularities, and invoked the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 in support of their case.

The society submitted that Wadia had executed registered agreements for sale with flat purchasers. It pointed out that 12 percent of the total consideration was payable to Wadia towards land. It contended that once flats were sold and a society was formed, Section 11 of MOFA required the promoter to convey his right, title and interest in the land and building.

The Court examined the statutory scheme of MOFA. It observed that the Act was enacted “to curb prevailing malpractices and abuses on the part of promoters.”

The Court held that Section 11 imposes a mandatory obligation on the promoter to convey his right, title and interest in the land and building to the society. It held that the promoter cannot retain a superior interest while transferring a limited or subordinate right.

The Court rejected the contention that conveyance must await completion of the entire layout. It held that postponing conveyance on that ground would leave flat purchasers without title for an uncertain period.

The Court also upheld the finding that RERA had no retrospective application to the dispute.

All three writ petitions were dismissed. The order dated 29 August 2022 granting unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of the society was upheld.

For Petitioner: Senior Advocate Navroz Seervai, with Advocates Meena Doshi, Hasan Mushabber, i/by Negandhi Shah & Himayatullah.

For Respondents: Senior Advocate Girish Godbole, with Advocates Aniruth Haryeni, Hemanta, Rahil Shah, i/b Veritas Legal for Ivory Properties; Advocates Bharat Zaveri with Aishwaryajeeta Tawde, i/by Kanga & Co., for Radhakrishna Properties; with AGP A.A. Nadkarni for State.