Mahendra Milapchand Kanungo & Ors. v. V/s.District Deputy Registrar of Co Op.Soc & Ors.

Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docxIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYCIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONWRIT PETITION NO. 13446 OF 2025Mahendra Milapchand Kanungo andOrs...PetitionersV/s.District Deputy Registrar of Co Op.Soc. and Ors...RespondentsWITHWRIT PETITION NO. 10023 OF 2026Panvel Municipal Corporation Throughits Assistant Director...PetitionerV/s.District Deputy Registrar Co Op andOrs...Respondents________________Mr. Aadil Parsurampuria with Mr. Atul Mishra, Ms. Gita Bhaskaran i/bMr. Aditya Lele for Petitioners in WP. 13446/2026 and Respondent Nos. 3 to6 in WP. 10023/2026.Mr. Rohit Sakhadeo, for Petitioner in WP No. 10023 of 2026 andRespondent No. 3 in WP. 13446 of 2025.Mr. Mahesh Vishwakarma i/b Ms. Megha Jain for Respondent No. 2(society) in both the Petitions.Mr. Aditya Udeshi with Mr. Rahul Sanghvi i/b Ms. Sanjay Udeshi and Co.for Respondent No. 4 in WP. 13446/2025 and Respondent No. 7 in WP.10023/2026.Mrs. Vaishali S. Nimbalkar, AGP for Respondent-State in WP.13446/2025.Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent-State in WP. 10023/2026.Mr. Vinayak Vasant Salaskar-Chairman present. ________________CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 28 AUGUST 2026.Page No. 1 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docxP.C.:1)The challenge in the present Petition is to the order dated26 September 2025 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar Co-operativeSocieties, Raigad-Alibuag and Competent Authority (CompetentAuthority) granting certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance of landadmeasuring 10938.63 Sq. Mtrs in favour of Respondent No. 2-society.Petitions are filed by the land owners and by Panvel MunicipalCorporation challenging the order of deemed conveyance to the limitedextent of conveying the layout road to the Respondent No. 2-society.2)I have heard Mr. Parsurampuria, the learned counselappearing for the Petitioners in WP. No. 13446/2025 and RespondentNos. 3 to 6 in WP. No. 10023/2026., Mr. Sakhadeo, the learned counselappearing for the Petitioner in WP No. 10023 of 2026 and RespondentNo. 3 in WP. No. 13446 of 2025, Mr. Vishwakarma, the learned counselappearing for Respondent No. 2 (society) in both the Petitions, Mr.Udeshi, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 in WP. No.13446/2025 and Respondent No. 7 in WP. No. 10023/2026, MrsNimbalkar, the learned AGP appearing for Respondent-State in WP. No.10023/2026 and Mr. Sawant, the learned AGP appearing for Respondent-State in WP. No. 10023/2026. 3)It appears that the total land owned by the land ownersadmeasured 17,330 Sq. Mtrs. The land owners granted developmentrights in favour of the developer only in respect of land admeasuring10938.63 Sq. Mtrs. The developer accordingly took up land admeasuringPage No. 2 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx10938.63 Sq. Mtrs for development in respect of which, the firstdevelopment permission dated 7 July 2014 was issued by the thenplanning authority i.e. Collector. In the development permission,following condition was incorporated:-२५ भवि(cid:6)ष्यात या सोबतच्या मंजूर रेखांकनामध्ये दुरुस्ती करून, सुधारिरत रेखांकनास मजुरीघ्या(cid:6)याची झाल्यास, सोबतच्या रेखांकनात दर्श&वि(cid:6)लेले रस्ते जर लगतच्या भूखंडांना जोडले असतीलतर ते सुधारिरत रेखांकनात त्याचप्रमाणे अबाधिधत ठे(cid:6)ण्यात या(cid:6)ेत.4)The land owners decided to develop the land retained bythem and a revised development permission for construction of BuildingNos. 8 and 9 was issued on 6 May 2022. In the revised permission soissued, a specific condition was imposed at Sr. No. 48 which reads thus:-48. The Owner / Developer Should Transfer area under Proposed / Layout /Internal Roads to the name of Panvel Municipal Corporation within one monthfrom issue of this certificate.5)Thus, both the conditions in the original development planas well as revised plan required maintenance and transfer of layout roadto the Municipal Corporation. Prima facie, both the conditions appear tobe in tune with the provisions of Unified Development Control andPromotion Regulations. Under regulation 3.3.4, while grantingdevelopment permission for land subdivision, it is necessary tocoordinate the roads in the adjoining lands. Regulation 3.3.4 providesthus:-3.3.4 Co-ordination of Roads in adjoining landsWhile granting the development permission for land sub-division or grouphousing/ campus planning, it shall be necessary to co-ordinate the roads in theadjoining lands subject to provisions mentioned in Regulation No.3.3.2.C –Page No. 3 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docxNote. Also, proper hierarchy of roads shall be maintained while deciding widthof road.6)Under Regulation 3.3.11, it is mandatory to handover thelayout roads to the planning authority without payment of compositionRegulation 3.3.11 provides thus:-3.3.11 Handing Over of Layout RoadsWhenever called upon by the Authority to do so, areas under internal layoutroads shall be handed over to the Planning Authority by way of deed afterdevelopment of the same, within such period as may be specified incommencement letter / development permission, for which no compensationshall be paid by the Planning Authority.7)It is the case of the land owners, the developer and PanvelMunicipal Corporation that the layout road sanctioned vide permissiondated 7 July 2014 aligns with the roads in the neighbouring layout plotsand that therefore the same must be handed over to Panvel MunicipalCorporation. It appears that the layout road has been handed over videregister Deed of transfer dated 18 December 2025 to the MunicipalCorporation. 8)The land owners, developers as well as Panvel MunicipalCorporation have no qualms about conveyance of the layout land infavour of the Respondent No. 2-society. Their only reservation is aboutconveyance of land covered by the internal roads admeasuring 2173.70Sq. Mtrs, which is incorporated in the impugned certificate of deemedconveyance. Page No. 4 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx9)It appears that the Respondent No. 2-society has alreadyinstituted Special Civil Suit No. 419 of 2024 (later renumbered as RCSNo. 45/2025) before the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, in which ithas sought following prayers:-a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement andOrder that the Indemnity Bond dated 29.05.2024 executed by Defendant No. 3to 7 having registered document no. PVL3-10377-2024 filed below Exhibit- "C"is null and void ab-initio, and not binding on the Plaintiff society;b) This Hon'ble Court further be pleased to direct the Defendants to executenecessary deed of cancellation and thereby cancel the said Indemnity Bonddated 29.05.2024 having registered document no. PVL3-10377-2024 filed belowExhibit- "C".c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement andOrder that the suit property, being the internal road of the Plaintiff Society isfor the exclusive use of the Plaintiff Society and its members, and that no otherparty, including the Defendants, has any right, title, or interest over the saidinternal road.d) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to pass a Judgement and Order ofpermanent injunction restraining Defendant No. 1 & 2 from demolishing,removing, or in any manner interfering with any structures, including gates,fences, or security installations, erected or installed by the Plaintiff society forsecurity purposes on the suit property, the internal road in question.e) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to hold and declare by a Judgement andOrder that the notices dated 21.05.2024 and 26.07.2024 a/w 20.08.2024 and03.09.204 filed below Exhibit-"R-Colly" herein are illegal, arbitrary and withoutany legal foundation; and thereafter this Hon'ble Court be pleased to set asidethe same.f) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased grant ad-interim and interim reliefs interms of prayer clause (c), and (d), pending the final disposal of the suit;g) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to draw a decree in terms of the reliefs asprayed herein above and thereafter this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct theSub-Registrar Panvel -3 to register the Decree so drawn by this Hon'ble Court.h) Award costs of the suit to the Plaintiff.Page No. 5 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx10)The Application filed by Respondent No. 2-society forseeking temporary injunction in Regular Civil Suit No. 45 of 2025 hasbeen rejected by the Trial Court by order dated 9 April 2025. It appearsthat Respondent No. 2-society has filed an Appeal against order dated 9April 2025 which is pending. 11)Thus whether Panvel Municipal Corporation is entitled toownership in respect of the layout road is an issue directly subjudice inthe pending Suit. As of now, the land owners and developers havehanded over the layout road to the Municipal Corporation in accordancewith the above quoted conditions in the development permission and inaccordance with the above quoted provisions of the UDCPR. Whetherthat transfer deed is valid or not can be decided by the Civil Court. 12)The Competent Authority is a tribunal of limitedjurisdiction. While conducting a summary inquiry under provisions ofSections 11 (3) and (4) of the The Maharashtra Ownership Flats(Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management andTransfer) Act, 1963, Competent Authority cannot decide complicatedquestions of entitlement of Panvel Municipal Corporation to own theland covered by the layout road. It cannot decide whether the indemnitybond executed for transfer of road to the Panvel Municipal Corporationor the Deed of Transfer are valid or otherwise. Only Civil Court casedecide those issues. Therefore, it is not necessary to consider the ratio ofthe judgments of the Apex Court in Hari Krishna Mandir Trust V/sState of Maharashtra and Ors. 1 and PT. Chet Ram Vashist (Dead) By1(2020) 9 SCC 356 Page No. 6 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docxLRs. V/s Municipal Corporation of Delhi 2 relied upon by Respondent No.2-society which deal with the aspect of reservation not amounting tovesting of land in favour of the planning authority. That issue can beconsidered by the Civil Court.13)In my view, therefore the land covered by the layout road isrequired to be excluded from the certificate issued by the CompetentAuthority at this juncture. If and when Respondent No. 2-societysucceeds in the suit and secures a declaration that it alone is entitled toexclusively use the land covered by layout road, conveyance of that landcan always to be granted in favour of the Respondent No. 2-society. TheRespondent No. 2-society can accordingly incorporate challenge to thedeed of transfer dated 18 December 2025 as well as seek a prayer forconveyance of land admeasuring 2173.70 Sq. Mtrs in the pending suit. Itis well settled principle that mere issuance of certificate of deemedconveyance land does not amount to final determination of rights andentitlements of parties qua the conveyed land (SEE: Arunkumar H. ShahHUF V/s. Avon Arcade Premises Co-operative Society Ltd and Ors. 3 )The Respondent No. 2-society can always seek conveyance of layout roadfrom the Civil Court if it can establish that handing over/transfer of theroad to Panvel Municipal Corporation is illegal. As of now the landcovered by the layout road needs to be deleted from conveyance ofRespondent No. 2-society leaving open liberty for it to seek conveyancethereof from the Civil Court. 2 1995 1 SCC 473(2025) 7 SCC 249Page No. 7 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx14)In view, of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the followingorder:-(i)Order dated 26 September 2025 passed by theCompetent Authority is set aside. (ii) The Application is remanded to the CompetentAuthority for issuance of fresh certificate of deemedconveyance by excluding land admeasuring 2173.70 Sq.Mtrs. covered by layout road from the certificate ofdeemed conveyance.(iii)The Competent Authority shall issue fresh certificateof deemed conveyance concerning only the balanceportion of land. (iv)It is clarified that entitlement of the Respondent No.2-society to seek ownership in respect of landadmeasuring 2173.70 Sq. Mtrs shall be subject to finaloutcome of the pending suit. (v)All rights and Contentions qua the layout road arekept open to be decided in the Suit. The Suit shall bedecided uninfluenced by observations made in the order.(vi)The Competent Authority shall proceed to issue freshcertificate of deemed conveyance as expeditiously aspossible preferably within a period of four months. Page No. 8 of 9 28 August 2026 Renuka 902-WP-13446-2025.docx(vii) Parties shall appear before Competent Authority on 7September 2026 and it shall not be necessary to issuefresh notices in the remanded proceedings. 15)With the above directions, both the Petitions are partly allowedand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]Page No. 9 of 9 28 August 2026