Mumbai: The City Civil Court has dismissed a suit by Veena Nagar Co-operative Housing Society against Nirman Construction Pvt Ltd and Veena Developers, which sought conveyance. The court rejected the plea citing delay.
Court Criticises Delay in Action
“The plaintiffs (the society and a flat owner) have failed to prove their claim miserably and they approached the court of law after a lapse of so many years without making any diligent efforts on their part,” the court said while dismissing their separate suits.
Society Formed in 1986, Property Possession in 1982
The society, Veena Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd in Malad (W), consists of five wings, four bungalows and 12 shops, and flats with attached terraces. All the flat owners, shop owners and bungalow owners formed the society in 1986. The flat purchasers, however, were handed over possession of the property in 1982.
Redevelopment Cited as Reason for Suit
The society and an individual flat purchaser had approached the City Civil Court against the developer for a conveyance. They pleaded that as the buildings are 37 years old and the society has decided to redevelop them.
Attempts to Contact Developers Failed
It was contended that they had made all possible attempts to contact the developers, but the developers failed to convey the property. Hence, they filed the suit in April 2017.
Court Notes 30-Year Gap in Action
The court later noted, “Though the building was constructed in 1980 and possession was given in 1982, they registered their societies and associations in 1985 and 1986. However, till today no conveyance deed has been executed in favour of the society and other house owners.” The court said that the suit was filed after a lapse of 30 years.
Lethargic Approach by Plaintiffs, Says Court
“It is the duty of the builder to convey the property in the name of the registered society. However, in the present case, the building was completed in 1982. Possession was delivered in the same year. When the plaintiffs' society and association were registered in 1985 and 1986, the plaintiffs ought to have had the conveyance deed executed by the defendants/promoters,” the court said.
Also Watch:
‘Hopeless Delay’ Led to Dismissal
“I find that, since 1985-1986 till 2017 or till 2019, no attempt or effort was made by the plaintiffs to get it executed. I find that there is a hopeless delay and a lethargic approach on the part of the plaintiffs, and for this reason also, the prayer for conveyance cannot be granted in favour of both the plaintiffs,” the court said while dismissing the suit.
