Bombay HC: Redeveloped Building Wings Cannot Break Away Into a New Society

The Bombay High Court has ruled that residents of individual wings within a single, integrated redevelopment project cannot register a breakaway cooperative housing society to escape an existing one. Justice Sandeep Marne, in a judgment delivered on September 18, 2026, quashed the registration of Atharva Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., which had been formed by flat purchasers in Wings A and B of a redeveloped complex in Prabhadevi, Mumbai.

Background of the dispute

The Swa-Griha Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. was originally formed in 1968 on MHADA land. It later undertook redevelopment along with adjoining plots, and the developer, M/s Sugee Developers Pvt. Ltd., constructed a single building of 240 flats spread across four wings — A, B, C and D. Original members and MHADA allottees occupied Wings C and D, while purchasers of new flats in Wings A and B later sought to break away and register their own society, citing management disagreements with the existing membership. The Deputy Registrar approved this new registration in February 2025, and the decision was upheld on appeal by the Joint Registrar and the State Cooperation Minister before Swa-Griha challenged it in the High Court.

What the Court held

The Court held that Section 9 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies (MCS) Act, 1960 — the ordinary provision for registering a new society — cannot be used to indirectly fragment a society that already exists over the same property. Where residents want to separate from an existing society, the Act provides a specific mechanism for that: the division procedure set out in Sections 17 and 18. Justice Marne noted that all four wings continued to share common infrastructure, including a ten-level podium parking area, entry gates, water tanks and electricity connections, and that flat purchasers in Wings A and B had signed sale agreements requiring them to become members of Swa-Griha CHS. The Court granted a six-week stay to allow Atharva CHS to pursue an appeal.

What this means for housing societies

• Wings or buildings within a single integrated redevelopment cannot lawfully register as a separate society simply by applying afresh under Section 9 — the correct route is the formal division process under Sections 17 and 18 of the MCS Act.
• Committees facing internal splits over management disputes should document whether common facilities (parking, utilities, entry points) are genuinely separable before pursuing or resisting a division.
• Sale agreements that bind purchasers to join a specific existing society are enforceable and can defeat a later claim to form a rival society on grounds of social or economic friction between resident groups.
• A Registrar-level approval of a new society's registration is not final — it can be challenged and set aside in a writ petition if it bypasses the statutory division scheme.

Societies currently undergoing multi-wing or phased redevelopment, or facing internal calls to split into separate societies, should review the division procedure under Sections 17 and 18 before attempting fresh registration, and should factor in this ruling when negotiating governance structures for large, multi-wing redevelopment projects.