Megha 19_wp_10798_2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.10798 OF 2018 Ambe Niwas Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. ...Petitioner V/s. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Housing Societies and Ors. ...Respondents ________________ Mr. Akshay Udeshi i/b. Mr. Mehul Khetia and Mr. Akshat Tiwari for the Petitioner. Mr. A.I. Patel, Addl. GP with Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent -State. Mr. Pankaj Kowli with Ms. Sampada S. Mahadik for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 22 JULY 2026 P.C.: 1) By this Petition, Petitioner -Society challenges order dated 23 May 2018 passed by the Divisional Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai Division, Mumbai, (Divisional Joint Registrar) dismissing Revision Application No.38 of 2017 and con@rming the order dated 19 August 2016 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, G/N Ward, Mumbai, (Deputy Registrar) while exercising jurisdiction under Section 23 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Page No. 1 of 4 22 July 2026 2026:BHC-AS:30372 Megha 19_wp_10798_2018 Act (the MCS Act). The Deputy Registrar has directed the Petitioner- Society to grant membership in favour of Respondent No.2. 2) I have heard Mr. Udeshi, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Patel, the learned Addl. GP for Respondent No.1-State and Mr. Kowli, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 and have considered the submissions canvassed by them. 3) According to the Petitioner-Society what is occupied by Respondent No.2 is a mere garage meant for parking of the vehicles and that the same forms part of the common amenity. It is the claim of the Petitioner-Society that Respondent No.2 is unauthorisedly occupying the said garage and that therefore he cannot be admitted as a member in respect of a mere garage. On the other hand, Mr. Kowli has invited attention of the Court to a plan submitted by the Society for construction of a boundary wall on 10 October 1984, which clearly depicts description of the premises in occupation of Respondent No.2 as an of@ce. He further submits that what is occupied by Respondent No.2 is a self-contained unit with a toilet inside. 4) In my view, the plan dated 10 October 1984 prepared by the Society’s own Architect clearly falsi@es the claim of the Society that the premises occupied by Respondent No.2 are mere garage meant for parking of vehicles. The Society itself described said premises as an of@ce. Page No. 2 of 4 22 July 2026 Megha 19_wp_10798_2018 5) The Deputy Registrar has also taken a note of the manner of acquisition of the premises by Respondent No.2. It appears that the mother of Respondent No.2 initially purchased Flat No.14 by Sale Deed dated 17 March 1961. The concerned premises in occupation of Respondent No.2 were initially in occupation of M/s. Jadhav Brothers during 1961 to 1978. After litigation, the Society came in possession of such premises. Respondent No.2 relies on letter dated 29 May 1978 by which Shir R.H. Shete, the erstwhile Secretary, who also functioned as Chairman (at the time of passing of order by the Deputy Registrar) issued a letter to the father of Respondent No.2 for paying amount of Rs.12,251/- in respect of the premises in question. The said amount was accordingly paid to the Society and purchase receipt, share money receipt and donation receipt came to be issued in the name of mother of Respondent No.2. Before the Deputy Registrar Mr. Shete admitted receipt of amount and issuance of the concerned receipts. 6) Perusal of the said share money receipt dated 19 June 1978 would indicate that the amount of Rs.251/- was accepted by the Society for purchasing one garage of the Society subject to acceptance of conditions on stamp papers. A separate receipt dated 19 June 1978 was issued in respect of Rs.251/- towards issuance of share certi@cate. Mother of Respondent No.2 was already a member of the Society qua Flat No.14 and holder of a share certi@cate. There was no occasion for the Society to issue one more share certi@cate to the mother on 19 June 1978. This would clearly indicate that the Society intended to issue share certi@cate in respect of the premises, which it claims as garage. Page No. 3 of 4 22 July 2026 Megha 19_wp_10798_2018 7) Considering the above position, in my view, the Deputy Registrar has correctly directed admission of Respondent No.2 as member of the Petitioner-Society. No interference is warranted in the impugned orders. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 4 of 4 22 July 2026 Signed by: Megha S. Parab Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 24/07/2026 11:01:26