Renuka Thakur 31-WP-8558-2023.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8558 OF 2023 Sakshigandha Wing A Co Op Soc Ltd. ...Petitioner V/s. Prithvirajshiri Association and Ors ...Respondents ________________ Mr. Balasaheb G. Ligade for Petitioner. Mr. Shailendra S. Kanetkar a/w Mr. P. Kothari for Respondent No. 1. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 28 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C.: 1) The Petitioner challenges order dated 18 October 2022 passed by the District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Pune City Pune and Competent Authority (District Deputy Registrar) allowing Application No. 6 of 2022 filed by the Petitioner-society but granting deemed conveyance of land admeasuring only 635.72 Sq. Mtrs out of total land admeasuring 1100 Sq. Mtrs in favour of the Petitioner- society. Petitioner-society had prayed for conveyance of land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs. However, since conveyance of land admeasuring only 635.72 Sq. Mtrs is granted, the Petitioner has filed the present Petition. Page No. 1 of 5 28 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka Thakur 31-WP-8558-2023.docx 2) I have heard Mr. Ligade, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Kanetkar, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1. 3) Despite being duly served, none has appeared on behalf of the Respondents Nos. 2 and 3, who are the original land owners and for whose benefit certain portion of the land was claimed to have been carved out. 4) It appears that in the original development agreement dated 20 December 2014, land admeasuring 236 Sq. Mtrs was apparently carved out for bungalow structure of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and building was to be constructed on the balance portion of land. Respondent No. 1 was the developer in whose favour development agreement dated 20 December 2014 was executed. Respondent No. 1 accordingly submitted plans for construction of the building. In the plan approved by the planning authority in the year 2015, gross plot area of 1100 Sq. Mtrs was considered from which area admeasuring 26.30 Sq. Mtrs was deducted for road acquisition leaving net plot area as 1073.70 Sq. Mtrs. On the net plot area, 0.9 FSI was sanctioned and after adding transferrable development rights, the total builtup area sanctioned for the plot was 1414.99 Sq. Mtrs. Respondent No. 1-developer distributed the total available BUA of 1414.99 Sq. Mtrs into 1130.25 Sq. Mtrs for construction of building of Petitioner-society and BUA of 250.91 Sq. Mtrs for the existing Banglow. The balance BUA of 33.83 Sq. Mtrs apparently remained unconsumed. Page No. 2 of 5 28 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka Thakur 31-WP-8558-2023.docx 5) It appears that after sanction of the plan and possibly during the course of construction of the building, a Deed of Rectification was executed between Respondent No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 27 March 2017, by which the land meant for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was apparently increased from 236 Sq. Mtrs to 438 Sq. Mtrs. Prima facie this action on the part of Respondent No. 1 and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 is contrary to the provisions of MOFA. Once, the land is subjected to the provisions of MOFA, the plan is sanctioned and flats are sold, it is impermissible for land owners and developers to effect any changes in respect of land entitlement contrary to the plan. In the present case, land distribution between the Petitioner and Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 will have to be in accordance with the sanctioned plan of 2015. The society’s architect has prepared a certificate dated 9 December 2021 on the basis of sanctioned plan dated 22 September 2015. The society’s architect correctly considered the share of Petitioner-society of 1130.25 Sq. Mtrs in the total sanctioned BUA of 1412.50 Sq. Mtrs. Accordingly, society’s land entitlement as correctly determined by the architect as 859.15 Sq. Mtrs. 6) The Competent Authority has egregiously erred in taking into consideration the Deed of Rectification dated 27 March 2017 and in ignoring the proportionate land division made by the architect in this certificate dated 9 December 2021. The Competent Authority has totally ignored the provisions of Government Resolution dated 22 June 2018, which contemplates division of land in the layout proportionate to the builtup area used in construction of each building. Page No. 3 of 5 28 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka Thakur 31-WP-8558-2023.docx 7) In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 18 October 2022 passed by the Competent Authority is indefensible and liable to be set aside. The Competent Authority needs to issue a fresh certificate of unilateral deemed conveyance in favour of the Petitioner- society in respect of land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs. If Respondent No. 1 or Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are aggrieved by conveyance of land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs to Petitioner-society and if they believe that they are entitled to own some more portion of land, they would always be at liberty to institute a suit in the Civil Court. By now, it is well settled possession of law that grant of deemed conveyance is not final determinative of rights and entitlements of parties in respect of the conveyed land reference in this regard can be made to the judgment of the Apex Court in Arunkumar H. Shaha (HUF) V/s Avon Arcade Premises CHSL1 8) I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:- (i) Order dated 18 October 2022 passed by the Competent Authority in Deemed Conveyance Application No. 6 of 2022 is set aside. (ii) Deemed Conveyance Application No. 6 of 2022 is remanded to the Competent Authority for limited purpose of issuance of fresh certificate of deemed conveyance of land admeasuring 859.15 Sq. Mtrs in favour of Petitioner- society. 1 (2025) SCC OnLine SC 825 Page No. 4 of 5 28 SEPTEMBER 2026 Renuka Thakur 31-WP-8558-2023.docx (iii) Parties shall appear before the Competent Authority alongwith copy of this order downloaded from website of this Court on 13 October 2026 and shall apply for fixation of date(s) of hearing for issuance of fresh certificate in the remanded proceedings. (iv) It is specifically clarified that the proceedings are remanded only for the limited purpose of issuance of fresh certificate of deemed conveyance by the Competent Authority land admeasuring of 859.15 Sq. Mtrs and the Competent Authority shall not entertain any other objection raised by the parties. (v) The Competent Authority shall proceed to issue a fresh certificate of deemed conveyance in favour of the Petitioner-society as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months. (vi) Once the certificate is issued by the Competent Authority, the jurisdictional Sub-registrar of Assurance shall proceed to register the same. 9) With the above directions, the Writ Petition is allowed and disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 5 of 5 28 SEPTEMBER 2026 Signed by: Renuka S Thakur Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 01/10/2026 10:40:54