Section 11 of MOFA – Deemed Conveyance – Powers of Competent Authority – SC Judgment
Champaben Hiralal Shah was the owner of the plot at Vile Parle. On 1.4.1972, she and HUF of her three sons formed partnership firm M/s. CH Shah & Sons. She had contributed the larger plot to the firm’s capital.
After the death of Champaben, the firm was re-constituted on 30.6.1983.
On 13.2.1987, the firm was dissolved, and the larger plot was partitioned between Lalbhai & Arun.
Respondent no.1 Society of the flat purchasers of building on Lalbhai Plot was formed on 15.7.2005.
By the Order dated 19.8.2017, the Consumer Forum directed the respondent no.10 to convey the said land to the Society.
On 13.1.2020, the respondent no.1 filed an application under Section 11(3) of MOFA for deemed conveyance for Lalbhai plot and also portion of Arun Plot. This was confirmed by the High Court vide judgment dated 25.2.2021 with liberty to the appellant to file suit for adjudication of title.
While dealing with section 11(3) applications, the Competent Authority has been conferred with quasi-judicial powers, they are of summary nature as seen from MOFA Rules, even cross-examination of the parties is prohibited under Rule 13(5) of the Rules, the Authority must record the reasons and therefore, the Authority cannot exclusively and finally decide the question of title. The Authority must record reasons while passing the final order. Therefore, the aggrieved party can always file a civil suit for their title and rights notwithstanding the order made under Section 11(4) of the MOFA.
Section 11(5) of the Registration Act 1908 enables the registering officer to give opportunity to the promoter as the certificate issued by the Authority is a “unilateral certificate”. However, the Registration Officer is neither an appellate nor revisional authority. He has no powers to reopen or set-aside the findings recorded by the Competent Authority while passing order for certificate.
The MOFA is a beneficial legislation enacted to protect home buyers, considering the ever-increasing the housing shortage in urban areas.
The Legislature has noted the increasing malpractices by the developers. The provisions of Section 11 of MOFA are for the benefit of the flat purchasers. In writ jurisdiction, the Court should not interfere with the order of deemed conveyance under section 11(4) unless the order is manifestly illegal. The writ court should generally be slow in interfering with such orders. The reason is that notwithstanding the order under Section 11(4), the remedy of aggrieved party to file a civil suit remains open.
Judgment dated 21.4.2025 of the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No.5377 of 2025 of Arunkumar H Shah HUF Vs. Avon Arcade Premises Cooperative Society Limited and others
