Bombay HC Quashes Order Giving 10-Shop Licensee Regular Membership, Says 2019 Law Did Not Automatically Upgrade Nominal Members

01Facts

The petitioner-society, formed following the subdivision of Worli Sagar CHSL, had admitted Respondent No. 4, a company, as a nominal member and permitted it to occupy ten shops.

¶ 2–8, 19–25

The allotment terms restricted transfer and required surrender of the shops to the society.

¶ 2–8, 19–25

Respondent No. 4 nevertheless relied on a registered 2024 deed of confirmation/transfer with a former allottee and sought ordinary membership directly from the Deputy Registrar.

¶ 2–8, 19–25

The Deputy Registrar directed the society to grant membership; the Divisional Joint Registrar dismissed the society’s revisions.

¶ 2–8, 19–25

The society challenged both orders in these petitions.

¶ 2–8, 19–25

02Issues

i.1. Whether the Deputy Registrar had jurisdiction to grant or direct membership when Respondent No. 4 had not first applied to the society for membership and obtained a refusal or non-decision.

¶ 57–59

ii.2. Whether Respondent No. 4, as a nominal member and shop occupant, was entitled to ordinary membership following the 2019 amendments to the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, or by virtue of the 2024 deed.

¶ 38–50, 60–62

iii.3. Whether the deed of confirmation/transfer conferred any title or transferable rights in the shops on Respondent No. 4.

¶ 24–25, 47–50

03Law Applied

Sections 22(2) and 23(2) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act), require an application for membership to the society and a resulting deemed admission, refusal, or non-decision before the Registrar’s jurisdiction is invoked; absent that statutory precondition, the Registrar cannot grant membership.

¶ 57–59

Chapter XIII-B, inserted by the 2019 amendment, excludes the former statutory provisions on nominal membership for housing societies and defines housing-society membership to include associate, joint and provisional members.

¶ 38–40

However, Section 154B-31 preserves pre-existing rules, orders and bye-laws, and the amendment does not automatically convert an existing nominal member into an ordinary member.

¶ 43–45

Section 154B-7 concerns transfer of a member’s share, interest or occupancy right, but expressly excludes a tenant’s or licensee’s rights; the Court treated the relevant transferable occupancy right as distinct from a mere licence or permission to occupy.

¶ 41–42, 62

The society’s bye-laws limited nominal membership to a sublettee, licensee, caretaker or occupant.

¶ 32–37

The Court distinguished Viviana CHSL v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 3938 of 2025 (decided 24 February 2025), as involving shop purchasers whose claim to regular membership was not barred by the facts and restrictions present here.

¶ 60–62

Provisions in the judgment · 170 · Linked ones open on LawLens

Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 168 provisions

Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4 Section 5 Section 6 Section 7 Section 8 Section 9 Section 10 Section 11 Section 12 Section 13 Section 14 Section 15 Section 16 Section 17 Section 18 Section 19 Section 20 Section 21 Section 22 Section 23 Section 24 Section 25 Section 26 Section 27 Section 28 Section 29 Section 30 Section 31 Section 32 Section 33 Section 34 Section 35 Section 36 Section 37 Section 38 Section 39 Section 40 Section 41 Section 42 Section 43 Section 44 Section 45 Section 46 Section 47 Section 48 Section 49 Section 50 Section 51 Section 52 Section 53 Section 54 Section 55 Section 56 Section 57 Section 58 Section 59 Section 60 Section 61 Section 62 Section 63 Section 64 Section 65 Section 66 Section 67 Section 68 Section 69 Section 70 Section 71 Section 72 Section 73 Section 74 Section 75 Section 76 Section 77 Section 78 Section 79 Section 80 Section 81 Section 82 Section 83 Section 84 Section 85 Section 86 Section 87 Section 88 Section 89 Section 90 Section 91 Section 92 Section 93 Section 94 Section 95 Section 96 Section 97 Section 98 Section 99 Section 100 Section 101 Section 102 Section 103 Section 104 Section 105 Section 106 Section 107 Section 108 Section 109 Section 110 Section 111 Section 112 Section 113 Section 114 Section 115 Section 116 Section 117 Section 118 Section 119 Section 120 Section 121 Section 122 Section 123 Section 124 Section 125 Section 126 Section 127 Section 128 Section 129 Section 130 Section 131 Section 132 Section 133 Section 134 Section 135 Section 136 Section 137 Section 138 Section 139 Section 140 Section 141 Section 142 Section 143 Section 144 Section 145 Section 146 Section 147 Section 148 Section 149 Section 150 Section 151 Section 152 Section 153 Section 154 Section 155 Section 156 Section 157 Section 158 Section 159 Section 160 Section 161 Section 162 Section 163 Section 164 Section 165 Section 166 Section 167 Section 168

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Section 11

Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management and transfer) Act, 1963 Section 4

04Reasoning

Respondent No. 4 had approached the Deputy Registrar without first applying to the society for ordinary membership.

¶ 58–59

Because no application, refusal or non-decision existed, the statutory basis for the Registrar’s jurisdiction was absent.

¶ 58–59

On the merits, the allotment documents showed that Respondent No. 4 received only conditional occupancy, could not transfer the rights, and was required to surrender the shops to the society.

¶ 21–25, 46–50

The former allottee had surrendered Shop No. 16 to the society before the society made a fresh allotment to Respondent No. 4; therefore, the later deed between them had no underlying transfer to confirm and conferred no title.

¶ 21–25, 46–50

The 2019 amendment neither ended existing nominal memberships nor upgraded them to ordinary membership.

¶ 44–45, 61–69

Unlike the purchasers in Viviana CHSL, Respondent No. 4 had no ownership interest and was not entitled to ordinary membership merely because it occupied the shops or had paid consideration.

¶ 44–45, 61–69

05Holding

The Court held that the Deputy Registrar’s orders were without jurisdiction and unsustainable on the merits.

¶ 70–72

Respondent No. 4 remained a nominal member for so long as its permitted occupancy continued; it was not entitled to ordinary membership absent title or ownership in the shops.

¶ 70–72

The Court set aside the Deputy Registrar’s orders dated 30 June 2026 and the Divisional Joint Registrar’s orders dated 9 October 2026, allowed all ten petitions, made the rules absolute, and awarded no costs.

¶ 70–72

It refused Respondent No. 4’s request to stay the judgment.

¶ 70–72

LawLens.Bombay High Court

Original Court PDF