Bombay HC Holds Rule 9 of MOFA Rules Overrides Clauses of Developer Agreement

Clauses 26 and 27 of the Flat Agreement provided that the Petitioner – Developer had reserved right to determine the extent,  mode and timing of the conveyance or lease.  Further option to form a single organization of all the premises to be constructed on the land was also provided.

However, the deemed conveyance was granted by the order dated 16.10.2025.

HELD that Rule 9 of the MOFA Rules overrides Clause 27 of the Agreement postponing the execution of a conveyance as laid down in the decision in Lok Housing and Construction Limited case (2025 SCC Online Bom 711).

If a developer offers to the Housing Society to execute a conveyance which is not agreeable to the Society, then obviously the Society would have a right to file an Application under Section 11(3) of MOFA.

Clause B(3) of the Government Resolution 22.6.2018 was whether th area for which the deemed conveyance should be granted as per the built up area or plinth and appurtenant area.   There are three societies in the lay out and only respondent no.3 society had submitted its measurements.  The other three societies have not conducted measurements of the land. In the circumstances, the authority ought to have appointed Architect to find out the area in respect of which the respondent no.3 society would be entitled to the deemed conveyance.  The whole purpose of appointing Architect is that the area conveyed to each society in common layout is crystalised and there are not disputes in the future.  However, the authority accepted the Architect certificate given by respondent no.3 and wrongfully held that there was no material to support retention of 146 sq.mts land by the petitioner developer despite provisions in the Agreement.

Judgment dated 23.12.2025 of the High Court of Bombay in  Writ Petition No.35377 of 2025 of Velentine Properties Private Limited    Vs.   State of Maharashtra and others