Bombay High Court Upholds Collective Rights in Housing Society Dispute
The Bombay High Court has firmly rejected a petition filed by an individual member of a housing society located in the Mumbai suburbs, who sought to challenge an order granting deemed conveyance to the society. In a significant ruling delivered on February 24, Justice Amit Borkar emphasized that the legal right to question such conveyance orders rests exclusively with the housing society as a collective entity, not with its individual members.
Petitioner's Claims and Court's Reasoning
The petition was filed by advocate Awadhesh Jha, a member of the New Shree Pooja Sudarshan CHSL in Thane district. Jha contended that the area conveyed by the deputy registrar of cooperative societies was less than what should have been granted under the deemed conveyance order. However, Justice Borkar clarified that the core issue was not merely about measurement discrepancies or entitlement in isolation.
"The real issue is whether an individual member has an independent legal right to maintain such a challenge when the conveyance stands in favour of the collective body, namely the society," Justice Borkar stated during the proceedings. He elaborated that the fundamental principle at stake involves the legal standing of members within cooperative housing societies.
Legal Precedents and Cooperative Law Principles
Justice Borkar referenced a landmark Supreme Court judgment from 1985, which established that once a person becomes a member of a cooperative society, they relinquish their individuality in legal matters concerning the society. According to this precedent, members have no independent rights except those explicitly granted by the statute and the society's bye-laws.
"He must act and speak through the society. He may have an internal voice within the society, but cannot step outside and litigate in substitution of the society," Justice Borkar explained, summarizing the Supreme Court's position. He noted that this legal stance has been consistently upheld in subsequent judicial decisions, reinforcing the collective nature of cooperative functioning.
Implications for Housing Society Governance
Applying these principles to the current case, Justice Borkar pointed out that the deemed conveyance had been granted in favor of the housing society as a whole. Therefore, any grievances regarding the conveyed area or the adequacy of the order "belongs to the society" collectively. The society, through its general body or managing committee, retains the discretion to decide whether to challenge the order or accept it.
"However, dissatisfaction with such a decision does not automatically confer a separate right upon a member to institute proceedings in his personal capacity," Justice Borkar emphasized. He warned that allowing individual members to file conflicting legal challenges would undermine the very foundation of collective functioning under cooperative law, potentially leading to chaos and inconsistent legal positions.
Alternative Remedies for Aggrieved Members
While dismissing the petition as not maintainable, Justice Borkar acknowledged that aggrieved members are not without recourse. Under cooperative law, members may seek directions or initiate other proceedings to compel appropriate action by the society itself. "What is impermissible is bypassing the society and directly challenging the conveyance order as though the member was the legal holder of the right," he clarified.
The judge also left open the possibility for the society to challenge the conveyance order at a later stage, should it choose to do so. "If, at a later stage, the society challenges the order, it will be examined on its own merits in accordance with law," he noted. However, for now, the individual member's petition stands dismissed, reinforcing the legal principle that cooperative societies must act as unified entities in external legal matters.
