What really powers the cloud? Behind every Google search, A...
A lot of what defines a home isn’t visible at handover. I...
Private equity has played a significant role in shaping Indi...
Luxury real estate is one of the most talked-about segments ...
Airports play a much bigger role than just enabling travel -...
• The Bombay High Court has upheld the right of housing societies in Vile Parle to obtain deemed conveyance despite a developer's objections linked to possible future TDR benefits.
• The court held that speculative development rights arising from future land acquisition cannot be used as grounds to delay conveyance obligations.
• Judges observed that developers cannot indefinitely postpone transfer of land by citing potential future FSI or redevelopment opportunities.
• The ruling reinforces housing societies' rights under MOFA and clarifies the limits of a developer's claim over future development potential.
The Bombay High Court has delivered a significant ruling on deemed conveyance, holding that a developer cannot delay the transfer of land to cooperative housing societies merely on the possibility of securing future Transferable Development Rights (TDR). The judgment came in a long-running dispute involving three housing societies in Mumbai's Vile Parle area and a developer contesting the extent of land eligible for conveyance.
The case centred on whether the developer could postpone conveyance on the argument that certain portions of land reserved for public purposes might eventually generate TDR that could be used for future development. The court rejected this argument, observing that such potential benefits remain uncertain and cannot override the statutory obligation to transfer property to housing societies.
The judgment noted that the developer had already delayed conveyance for decades while attempting to preserve the possibility of additional development rights. The court pointed out that proposed buildings that were once part of the original layout could not be constructed because the anticipated floor space benefits linked to surrendered land never materialised. As a result, the developer's attempt to rely on future TDR prospects was found to be legally unsustainable.
The court further observed that land reserved for public amenities such as a municipal market or primary school may or may not be acquired in the future. Even if acquisition eventually takes place, compensation could be provided either in monetary form or through TDR. Such compensation, the court said, cannot automatically be treated as development potential attached to land that is otherwise required to be conveyed to housing societies.
In its analysis, the High Court reiterated a broader legal principle established in earlier judgments: developers cannot indefinitely retain control over property by arguing that additional FSI or TDR may become available at a later stage. Once the disclosed development potential has been substantially utilised and the obligation to convey arises under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), the transfer process cannot be postponed indefinitely.
While the court upheld the societies' claim to deemed conveyance, it also identified a technical error in the earlier order of the competent authority. Certain portions of land that had been surrendered for a development plan road, reserved for public amenities, acquired for road widening or affected by slum encroachments were excluded from the final area eligible for conveyance. Consequently, the matter was remanded to the competent authority to issue a revised deemed conveyance certificate for approximately 16,584 square metres of land instead of the larger area originally granted.
The ruling is expected to be closely watched by housing societies and developers alike, as it reinforces the principle that conveyance rights cannot be indefinitely deferred on the basis of uncertain future development opportunities. It also strengthens the position of societies seeking ownership rights over land and common areas after long delays in conveyance.
Source- NIC