HARSHADA A VILLA CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. THR. ITS CHAIRMAN / SECRETARY vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CO OPERATION AND ORS — WP/8600/2025

Case under Mah. Co-op. Soc. Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Rule Made Absolute on 24th March 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010274622025

Filing Number

WP/17487/2025

Filing Date

08-May-2025

Registration No

WP/8600/2025

Registration Date

27-Jun-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

Cooperative Socities ( 103 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

24-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Rule Made Absolute

Last updated 04-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Co-op. Soc. Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HARSHADA A VILLA CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. THR. ITS CHAIRMAN / SECRETARY

    Adv. Milind Prabhune

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CO OPERATION AND ORS

  2. 2.DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES THANE AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY

  3. 3.AMBA MATA CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD

    Adv. D S Mhaispurkar,MANGESH DHONDU NALAVADE

  4. 4.USHASHREE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD

    Adv. D S Mhaispurkar,MANGESH DHONDU NALAVADE

  5. 5.YASH SAURABH CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD

    Adv. MANGESH DHONDU NALAVADE

  6. 6.M/S URMIRAJ BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS

  7. 7.M/S MAHALAXMI BUILDERS

  8. 8.M/S PRASANA BUILDERS PVT. LTD

  9. 9.DATTATRAY SHIVRAM BHOITE

  10. 10.VINAYAK DATTATRAY BHOITE

  11. 11.AARTI ARUN KADAM

  12. 12.REENA CHANDRAKANT TIRODKAR

  13. 13.KETAKI VINOD NIMBALKAR

  14. 14.SAPNA SUNIL PARAB

  15. 15.RAJASHRI NARAYAN PARUKEKAR

  16. 16.HARSHADA VISHWESH PRABHU

  17. 17.HEENA JAYESH JAIN

  18. 18.SAURABH NARAYAN PARULEKAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit BorkarView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court ruled that the Competent Authority's January 18, 2024 order granting increased land area (5,014.54 sq. mtrs. instead of the originally granted 3,397.80 sq. mtrs.) was without jurisdiction and set it aside. The court held that a corrigendum enlarging previously granted rights constitutes a substantive fresh decision, not a mere procedural/arithmetical correction, and the Authority lacks power to reopen concluded decisions under the MOFA. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit Borkar

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amit BorkarView PDF

  5. 23-Mar-2026

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  6. 09-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  7. 29-Aug-2025

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  8. 03-Jul-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. JamadarView PDF

  9. 03-Jul-2025

    For Circulation

    Hon'ble Shri Justice N. J. Jamadar

  10. 26-Jun-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 08-May-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/8600/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court ruled that the Competent Authority's January 18, 2024 order granting increased land area (5,014.54 sq. mtrs. instead of the originally granted 3,397.80 sq. mtrs.) was without jurisdiction and set it aside. The court held that a corrigendum enlarging previously granted rights constitutes a substantive fresh decision, not a mere procedural/arithmetical correction, and the Authority lacks power to reopen concluded decisions under the MOFA. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case