Court Rules Godown Qualifies as Separate 'Flat' Under Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, Affirming Membership for Respondents Despite Society's Objections
In a significant judgment delivered on August 20, 2026, the Bombay High Court upheld the membership rights of individuals owning a godown within a cooperative housing society, clarifying the interpretation of "flat" under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (MCS Act). The case, Ashwini Heights Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. v. Jyoti Nitin Lunia and Others, concerned the entitlement of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to membership in the petitioner society based on their ownership of a godown situated in the basement of the society's building.
The petitioner society had opposed the membership claims on two principal grounds: first, that the godown was not independently sanctioned and was merely a part of Shop No. 8 purchased earlier by the predecessor owner; and second, that the transfer of ownership to the respondents occurred without the society's consent, violating bye-laws requiring a No Objection Certificate (NOC). The society contended that only premises recognized as "flats" in the sanctioned development plan could qualify for membership, and since the godown was not separately numbered or independently accessible, membership should be denied.
The respondents, however, argued that under Section 154B-1(13) of the MCS Act, the definition of "flat" includes a godown, and that the godown was separately sanctioned in the original and revised building plans. They also produced a separate occupation certificate and commencement certificate for the godown, demonstrating its independent status. Additionally, they pointed out that the godown was assessed separately for taxes and had independent access through a common staircase, distinguishing it from the shop above.
The Court extensively examined the statutory framework of the MCS Act, particularly the amended provisions in Chapter XIII-B. It emphasized that while the definition of "flat" is broad and includes various types of premises such as godowns, the critical criterion for membership eligibility is that the premises must be independently sanctioned in the development permission plan. The Court relied on the precedent set in Uday Dalal v. Divisional Joint Registrar (2025 SCC Online Bom 5202), where it was held that the sanctioned plan is the foundational document for determining membership eligibility, and no premises not recognized in the sanctioned plan can be treated as flats for membership purposes.
Upon inspection of the original sanctioned plan dated June 25, 1993, and the revised sanctioned plan dated July 6, 2021, the Court found that the godown in question was indeed separately sanctioned and assigned a distinct number ("Godown No. 1") in the revised plan. The godown's access was through common staircases, with no internal staircase connecting it to Shop No. 8, confirming its independent status. The Court also noted that the petitioner society had never previously objected to the godown's independence until this litigation and had issued only one share certificate to the original purchaser due to the initial common ownership of shop and godown.
Rejecting the petitioner society's arguments regarding the alleged illegality of the respondents' documents and the absence of society consent, the Court held that such issues must be challenged in separate proceedings and cannot be used to deny membership where the statutory and evidentiary requirements are met. The Court highlighted that the society benefits from recognizing separate memberships for the shop and the godown, as it results in additional service charges and does not reduce the number of sanctioned flats.
Consequently, the Bombay High Court dismissed the petition filed by the Ashwini Heights Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., affirming the order of the Divisional Joint Registrar, which had directed the society to admit Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as members based on their ownership of the godown.
This judgment clarifies and reinforces the legal position that a godown, when independently sanctioned in a development plan, qualifies as a "flat" under the MCS Act and entitles the owner to cooperative society membership. It underscores the primacy of the sanctioned plan in determining membership rights and limits the scope of society objections that do not arise from statutory or plan-based grounds.
Bottom Line:
Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 - Membership of Cooperative Housing Society - Godown treated as a separate unit for membership purposes under Section 154B-1(13) of the Act.
Statutory provision(s):
Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 Sections 23(2), 154B-1(13), 154B-2(1), 154B-3, 154B-5
