The Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court held that housing societies can clamp illegally parked automobiles after delivering a 48-hour written notice for acceptable reasons.

The Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court dismissed an appeal filed by two residents of Magnum Tower Co-operative Housing Society in Lalbaug challenging the society’s power to clamp vehicles parked in unauthorised spaces, reinforcing co-operative housing societies’ authority to regulate common amenities.

In a 16-page decision issued on July 1, President SS Sapatnekar maintained an earlier order of Co-operative Court No. 3, Mumbai, allowing the society to clamp illegally parked vehicles if it first sends a 48-hour written notice outlining the reasons for the action.

The appeal followed an interim order issued on February 26, 2026, in a disagreement between the unit owners and the society. The appellate court refused to overturn the lower court’s interim decision, stating that the trial court had used its power wisely and had already balanced the interests of both parties by establishing procedural safeguards before any coercive action could be taken.

The court confirmed that vehicle clamping can only be carried out after a 48-hour prior written notice; the notification must include recorded and cogent reasons, and the trial court’s interim protection stays in effect until the issue is resolved.

The flat owners complained that…

The society delayed membership, subjected them to harassment, placed additional financial obligations, and arbitrarily enforced parking restrictions.

The appellants argued that the housing society…> Collected Rs 5000 for legal document verification.> Accepted a cash donation of Rs 1.50 lakh for the welfare fund.> Fined Rs 86,138 for alleged illegal parking.> Refused to provide more parking, despite having many available places.> Constructed a communal hall, kitchen, and laundry rooms in areas supposedly intended for parking

They also wanted >.> Alleged unlawful buildings are removed.> Refund of sums allegedly obtained illegally.

Parking dispute.

During the appellate hearing, the appellants stated that they were not pursuing their interim prayers for additional parking places or a waiver of parking charges. Instead, the appeal focused only on challenging the Trial Court’s approval for the organization to clamp illegal automobiles.

The Housing Society argued that…

Parking areas remain under the developer as conveyance has not yet been finalized.
The group does not allot or sell parking spaces.
Flat buyers obtained parking directly from the developer.
Members cannot rightfully claim numerous parking places.

The General Body authorized severe parking rules.

Parking areas remain under the developer as conveyance has not yet been finalized.
The group does not allot or sell parking spaces.
Flat buyers obtained parking directly from the developer.
Members cannot rightfully claim numerous parking places.

Democratic decisions are upheld.

The Appellate Court ruled that General Body resolutions reflect the collective desire of members.
Courts should generally not interfere unless resolutions are illegal or beyond jurisdiction.
The appellants had never disputed the legitimacy of the resolution dated May 5, 2025.
Therefore, the parking resolution remains to bind all members.

Court relies on precedents.

The appellate court cited previous precedents stating that cooperative societies had constitutional autonomy.
Courts should avoid unwarranted meddling with their internal matters.
Valid resolutions taken under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act should be carried out.
The Act, the society’s bye-laws, and General Body resolutions all govern the rights of members.
Such resolutions are binding unless overruled by a competent legal forum.

The dispute

The issue is between Nirmal Ajayraj Sottany and Rushek Nirmal Sottany, who bought Flat No. 1501 in Magnum Tower in an auction held by Punjab National Bank. They claimed to have cleared maintenance dues of around Rs 3 lakh, paid a transfer fee of Rs 25,000, and acquired a no-due certificate from the developer.

According to Knight Frank India’s research of Inspector General of Registration (IGR) data, Mumbai had 80,221 property registrations in the primary and secondary markets in the first half of 2026, up 6% year on year. Stamp duty receipts also increased by 4% to ₹6,968 crore.

In June alone, the city recorded over 13,000 property transactions, a 15% increase over the previous year and the biggest monthly total in the last 14 years. The Maharashtra government collected almost ₹1,000 crore in stamp duty from these registrations, according to a study.

The Mumbai real estate market had over 12,315 property registrations in May 2026, up 7% year on year, the greatest number of registrations for the month of May in the previous 14 years.

How Mumbai property registrations stack up

June 2026 is expected to outperform the previous June peak in 2025, indicating that Mumbai’s housing industry will continue to thrive despite a high base. Property registrations are forecast to rise 7.3% year on year, while stamp duty collections are expected to rise 4%, reflecting a shift in transaction composition, with mid-market home sales accounting for a larger share than last year.

Property registrations are forecast to rise 7% sequentially from May 2026, while stamp duty collections are expected to rise 2%.

Mumbai’s residential market has maintained its strong momentum, with June 2026 seeing the most monthly property registrations in 14 years. This achievement was accomplished despite a strong foundation from the previous year, demonstrating the robustness of end-user demand and sustained homebuyer confidence,” stated Shishir Baijal, International Partner, Chairman, and Managing Director of Knight Frank India.

The market’s strength is further reflected in H1 2026 registrations, which increased on top of an already strong first half of 2025. While stamp duty collections remained largely stable over the same period last year, indicating a moderate increase in average transaction values, the strong increase in registrations suggests that demand is becoming more broad-based across buyer segments rather than concentrated in higher-value transactions. This demonstrates the depth and resilience of Mumbai’s residential market, he said.

The BMC is going forward with the implementation of an occupancy certificate (OC) amnesty initiative, which will provide relief to thousands of individuals living in buildings without a valid OC. The proposal, which will be presented to the civic standing committee on Thursday, complies with guidelines issued by the urban development department (UDD) on December 11, 2025.

Approximately 25,000 occupied buildings in Mumbai lack an OC because to builders’ procedural errors, pending compliances, infractions, or variations from approved plans. Residents who do not have an OC typically have difficulty receiving property-related services and approvals, despite the fact that the local body is not intended to authorize occupation without one.

Following the state government’s request, the BMC developed a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) and implementation guidelines. However, during meetings with elected representatives, various ideas were made. At a meeting on February 19, 2026, corporators asked the BMC to expand the benefit to flats of all sizes, rather than the original rule of 80 square metres, and to cover all commercial buildings rather than only schools and hospitals. They also asked that all residential constructions with approved blueprints become eligible for OCs.

A draft proposal was then presented to the BMC’s standing committee in April 2026. However, due to concerns and suggestions from corporators, the idea was not taken up for consideration and was eventually withdrawn, seeking additional advice from the state government. To address the issues mentioned, the BMC sent a new proposal to the UDD on April 15, 2026, requesting changes and additional guidance. The government’s response is yet awaited.

Meanwhile, complaints from impacted homeowners and local representatives continue to stream in, putting increasing pressure on the BMC to start implementing the scheme under current government directions while waiting for further instructions.

The new planned approach will apply to residential structures, hospitals, and schools that were occupied before to November 17, 2016, and have valid planning authority approval. Residential units with a carpet size of up to 80 square meters will be eligible for incentives. Applicants must provide legitimate documentation to verify the legitimacy of approvals and proof of occupation.

Approximately 25,000 occupied buildings in Mumbai lack an OC because to builders’ procedural errors, pending compliances, infractions, or variations from approved plans. Residents who do not have an OC typically have difficulty receiving property-related services and approvals, despite the fact that the local body is not intended to authorize occupation without one.

Following the state government’s request, the BMC developed a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) and implementation guidelines. However, during meetings with elected representatives, various ideas were made. At a meeting on February 19, 2026, corporators asked the BMC to expand the benefit to flats of all sizes, rather than the original rule of 80 square metres, and to cover all commercial buildings rather than only schools and hospitals. They also asked that all residential constructions with approved blueprints become eligible for OCs.

A draft proposal was then presented to the BMC’s standing committee in April 2026. However, due to concerns and suggestions from corporators, the idea was not taken up for consideration and was eventually withdrawn, seeking additional advice from the state government. To address the issues mentioned, the BMC sent a new proposal to the UDD on April 15, 2026, requesting changes and additional guidance. The government’s response is yet awaited.

Meanwhile, complaints from impacted homeowners and local representatives continue to stream in, putting increasing pressure on the BMC to start implementing the scheme under current government directions while waiting for further instructions.

The new planned approach will apply to residential structures, hospitals, and schools that were occupied before to November 17, 2016, and have valid planning authority approval. Residential units with a carpet size of up to 80 square meters will be eligible for incentives. Applicants must provide legitimate documentation to verify the legitimacy of approvals and proof of occupation.

The plan also accepts applications from builders, landowners, registered housing organizations, and, in some situations, individual flat owners via registered architects or licensed surveyors. A dedicated online gateway within the Auto-DCR system is suggested to allow applications to be submitted and processed.

As part of the relief measures, the BMC has recommended a 50% discount on various regularisation fees, including those for enclosed balconies, lofts, and other acceptable changes. Additional concessions have been offered for the regularisation of livable areas previously exempt from FSI calculations.

Civic officials have underlined that issuing OCs under the amnesty scheme does not erase developers or owners of their legal responsibilities, and that action against infractions can still be taken under applicable legislation.

The proposed policy is based on a previous OC amnesty scheme launched by the BMC in 2004, which applied to properties occupied prior to March 25, 1991. Residents’ subsequent demands resulted in suggestions to extend the eligibility period to January 6, 2012, and then to November 17, 2016. The state government has now largely agreed to the updated framework and directed the BMC to carry out the strategy with appropriate amendments.