Bombay HC Clarifies – Authority’s findings do not bind Civil Courts in Deemed Conveyance Disputes
The proceeding under Section 11 of MOFA is primarily documentary. It rests on agreements under Section 4, registration of the society, plans, architect certificates and area statements. It is not a proceeding that ordinarily requires oral evidence or cross examination. Nothing prevented the petitioners from filing their written objections along with supporting material. No order of the Authority barred them from placing documents on record.
The society was registered in 2001. For about nineteen years no conveyance occurred. The statutory obligation on the promoter is clear; inaction over such a long period undermines any claim of innocence or inadvertence.
a deemed conveyance order transfers only such right, title and interest as the promoter in fact possesses. It does not create a higher or independent title. It does not enlarge the rights of the society beyond what the promoter himself lawfully holds.
The petitioner no.3 had acquired development rights of the land, it was mortgaged with the petitioner no.2 and by the deed dated 27.4.2015, the petitioner no.2 had assigned its business rights in favour of the petitioner no.1.
The petitioner no.1 developed the property and executed agreements under Section 4 of MOFA in favour of purchasers – members of the respondent no.1 society registered in 2001.
Judgment dated 9.2.2026 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.10985 of 2022 of Vijay Suraksha Realty LLP & Ors Vs. Chairman / Secretary Bldg Nos.6 and 7 Vijay Park CHS Limited and Others

