9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1133X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of an area measuring 2634.36 sq. Mtrs. Out of CTS Nos. 661 to 691 of Village Kole Kalyan, Bandra. 3. At the outset, we consider it proper to mention that when IA No. 3/2013 tiled by Respondent No. 3 was listed for hearing, learned Counsel for the parties were heard on the merits of the case and the order was reserved. 4. Late Shri Mohan Singh (predecessor of the Appellants) owned land measuring 4144.90 sq. Mtrs. Comprised in CTS Nos. 661 to 691 of Village Kole Kalyan, Taluka Andheri. On 16.10.1979, he entered into an agreement with Respondent No. 4 for sale of land measuring 3762.45 sq. Mtrs. After execution of the agreement, Respondent No. 4 constructed five buildings, which were occupied by the members of three Co-operative Housing Societies, i.e., Respondent Nos. 3, 5 and 6. 5. Due to non-payment of the amount in terms of agreement dated 16.10.1979, the Appellants, who are the legal heirs of late Shri Mohan Singh, issued notice dated 16.3.2005 and terminated agreement dated 16.10.1979. After four years, Respondent No. 5 approached the Appellants for purchase of 702.341 sq. Mts. Out of the land owned by late Shri Mohan Singh. At the asking of the Appellants, Respondent No. 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a notice to this effect was issued by his office on 16.5.2012. On 21.5.2012, Respondent No. 1 heard the arguments of the counsel for the applicant and closed the matter. He finally decided the application vide order dated 12.6.2012, the operative portion of which is reproduced below: ORDER AND THE CERTIFICATE In exercise of the powers conferred on me under Section 5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963, I, S.P. Ghorpade, District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Mumbai City (3). Competent Authority under Section 5A of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963. 1. Certify under Section 11(3) of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963, that the Royal Diamond Park Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Datta Mandir Road, Kole Kalyan Vakola, Santacruz (E), Mumbai 400 055 is entitled and is a fit case to grant unilateral conveyance executed as deemed conveyance in their favour and to have it registered. Thus, it is entitled to have unilateral conveyance of land admeasuring gross plot area entitlement of 2634.36 Sq. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. However this order is issued on the basis of documents and information submitted by the Applicant and in the belief that there are no dispute regarding the title of the said land and subject to the following conditions. i. The information/documents furnished by the applicant are correct and genuine. ii. That if the above documents produced by the applicant are found hereinafter to be incorrect and not genuine, the applicant will be liable to be face the consequences in accordance with the law. 11. The Appellants challenged the aforesaid order in Writ Petition No. 10287/2012. One of the grounds taken by the Appellants was that Respondent No. 1 unilaterally changed the date of hearing and finally decided the matter without ensuring service of notice issued to the parties about the changed date of hearing. This is evident from the following statements contained in paragraphs f) and g) of the writ petition: f) This application was opposed by the Petitioners as also the Respondent Nos. 5 and pleadings filed thereat. The Hon'ble Competent Authority despite the fact that the Advocate for the Respondent No. 3 submitting that she is not filing the rejoinder has taken the rejoi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... else to file written arguments. On the same date matter was adjourned for arguments to 17.4.2012. Advocate for Petitioners neither raise any objections nor he pleaded for longer date. Thereafter also on 17.4.2012 Advocate for Applicant society filed rejoinder and copy was served on Petitioners on 17.5.2012. Petitioners were directed to file written arguments on or before next hearing which was fixed on 15.5.2012. On 15.5.2012 also Petitioners didn't file written arguments and submitted letter for keeping matter after 9.6.2012. Therefore matter was fixed on 19.6.2012. But later on it was revealed that on 19.6.2012 near about 41 Revision Applications were listed on the board for hearing before this Respondent and therefore it was decided to pre-pone the matter to 21.5.2012 and notices to that effect were sent to Petitioners by registered post but this office has not received acknowledgement from the postal department. 3. I say and submit that, the decision of preponing the matter was taken by my predecessor solely in bonafide interest with a view to complete the proceeding within a period of six months as contemplated in Section 11(4) of MOFA 1963. (Emphasis added) 13. Along ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15. Shri Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel for Respondent No. 3, supported the decision of Respondent No. 1 to prepone the date of hearing by pointing out that the officer concerned was compelled to do so because he was required to decide the application within six months of its institution. Shri Divan referred to letter dated 15/18.2.2013 sent by Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Mumbai City (North 2) to Ms. Pritha Dave and argued that the intimation given to the Appellants' counsel was sufficient to make them aware of the decision taken by Respondent No. 1 to prepone the date of hearing. Shri Divan submitted that the Appellants cannot plead denial of hearing by Respondent No. 1 as the ground for quashing the order passed by him because their advocate had been duly intimated about the changed date of hearing. However, learned senior counsel could not offer any clarification about the delivery of notice to the sender on 22.5.2012. 16. We have considered the respective arguments and carefully scrutinized the record. 17. By producing xerox copies of the receipt of speed post and two communications dated 15.2.2013 sent by Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Mumbai City ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
