Bombay High Court

South Bombay housing society

Grand Paradi Society

Kemps Corner

lawyer Birendra Saraf

General Body meetings

grants relief to the managing committee and said that the issue had already been settled.The Bombay High Court has set aside an order by the state, which disqualified the managing committee of afor five years and appointed an administrator.Justice SC Gupte, while granting the relief to managing committee members of the, in, observed that the issue over which the administrator was appointed had already been amicably settled and had therefore “achieved quietus.”The legal battle began in early 2016, when brothers and Grand Paradi residents Rikhav and Rushabh Shah acquired another flat, applied for membership of the society with respect to the flat and sought permission to renovate it.The managing committee, citing a decision of the society’s General Body, sought transfer charges at the rate of Rs 2,000 per square feet, instead of the maximum Rs 25,000 as mandated by the society bye-laws. The society also withheld the no-objection certificate for renovation of the flat.The Shahs filed an FIR against the managing committee members as well as the manager, and also complained to the Registrar of Societies alleging high-handedness by the committee members.In his order, the Dy Registrar directed the committee to make Shahs members. The order had to enforced, as the society had failed to abide by it. But, meanwhile, the Shahs and the committee members resolved their dispute, and the brothers withdrew their complaint and all grievances against the committee members. A few days later, four other members of the society lodged a complaint with the Dy Registrar seeking action against the committee for charging exorbitant transfer fees and their conduct with respect to the incident relating to the Shahs, leading the state cooperation minister to pass an order disqualifying the managing committee.In the HC, the committee members’submitted that the Shah incident was resolved even before the relevant complaint was filed, and that the transfer charges were levied pursuant to decisions taken at, some of which were also attended by the complainants. In fact, Saraf said that these very same complainants had collected transfer charges when they were committee members.Senior Advocate Vineet Naik, appearing for the complainants submitted that the issue with the Shahs was not closed as they had revived the FIR later. He added that the committee had defied the Dy Registrar’s first order and that they had been acting in a high-handed manner not only with Shahs but with other members.Justice Gupte, however, ruled in favour of the committee members, even rejecting a plea to stop the committee members from exercising their power till the time the complainants approach the Supreme Court.