The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 1 April 2025 in the recent case of M/S Faime Makers Pvt. Ltd. Vs District Deputy Registrar, Co - Operative Societies (3), Mumbai & Ors. held that a certificate of deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA (defined below) cannot be issued automatically without strict compliance.
BACKGROUND
The case pertains to a challenge against the deemed conveyance certificate issued under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 (“MOFA”). The petitioner is a developer/builder who objected to the granting of deemed conveyance to a cooperative housing society (respondent). The society had applied for deemed conveyance on the grounds that the developer failed to convey the land and building to the society within the time prescribed by law.
The Deputy District Registrar (“DDR”) issued the certificate of deemed conveyance in favor of the society. The Petitioner sought to set aside this certificate, arguing procedural lapses and nonfulfillment of statutory requirements.
ISSUES
- Whether the DDR followed due process under MOFA while granting the deemed conveyance certificate?
- Whether the developer's objections were duly considered?
- Whether the society fulfilled the necessary criteria under MOFA to be eligible for deemed conveyance?
JUDGMENT
The court set aside the deemed conveyance certificate granted to the respondent-society, concluding that:
- Procedural lapses were evident in the process adopted by the DDR.
- The petitioner's objections were not properly addressed or adjudicated.
- The DDR acted in violation of principles of natural justice, especially the right to be heard.
- The evidence relied upon by the DDR was insufficient and lacked due verification.
The Hon'ble Court held that a certificate of deemed conveyance under Section 11 of MOFA cannot be granted mechanically. It requires strict compliance with procedural fairness, including a proper hearing of objections and verification of evidence. Any decision made in violation of natural justice or without due scrutiny is liable to be quashed.
MHCO COMMENT
This judgment reinforces a critical principle that quasi-judicial bodies must observe the principles of natural justice. While the object of MOFA is to protect flat purchasers and ensure conveyance, such statutory protections cannot come at the cost of procedural fairness. The case is a reminder that expediency must not override legality, and authorities must ensure both parties are fairly heard. The judgment doesn't dismiss the society's right to conveyance but mandates that due process must be followed—an important balance between rights and rule of law.
This article was released on 9 April 2025.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
