CELEBRATING MORE THAN YEARS
AWARDS & RECOGNITION
UPDATES
PRACTICE AREAS
PEOPLE
News and Articles
Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act (MAOA)
Understanding Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act (MAOA): A Practical Guide for Owners
Apartment ownership in Maharashtra is governed by a distinct legal framework separate from cooperative housing societies. The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA provides a statutory structure for ownership of individual apartments and shared common areas within a building. Many flat purchasers are unaware of how this Act operates and how it differs from society-based ownership. Understanding the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA is essential for protecting ownership rights, managing common areas and resolving disputes in apartment buildings. This guide explains the legal structure, rights and obligations of apartment owners, formation of associations, conveyance, common area management and practical challenges under MAOA. Legal Background of Apartment Ownership in Maharashtra The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act was enacted to provide a clear legal mechanism for individual ownership of apartments along with proportionate rights in common areas. Unlike cooperative societies, where ownership is structured through shareholding, MAOA recognises direct ownership of an apartment as heritable and transferable property. The Act operates alongside other property laws such as the Transfer of Property Act and Registration laws. It also interacts with the Real Estate Regulation framework for new projects. Apartment ownership under MAOA is document driven and requires proper declaration by the promoter. Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA and Its Core Structure The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA establishes a system where each apartment owner holds exclusive ownership of their unit along with an undivided interest in common areas. This interest is inseparable from the apartment and passes automatically upon transfer. The Act requires the promoter to execute and register a Declaration submitting the property to MAOA. This Declaration defines the building description, apartment numbers, common areas, percentage of undivided interest and bye laws governing management. Without a properly registered Declaration, the building cannot operate fully under MAOA. Declaration and Deed of Apartment A Declaration is the foundational document under MAOA. It must be registered and include complete details of land, building structure, common facilities and proportionate interests. Each purchaser then receives a Deed of Apartment which confirms ownership of the specific unit and proportionate share in common areas. The Deed of Apartment is a title document and must be registered to establish legal ownership. Incomplete or defective Declarations often lead to disputes.  Difference Between MAOA and Cooperative Housing Society Model Under cooperative housing laws, members own shares in a society which in turn owns the property. Under MAOA, owners hold direct title to their apartments. This distinction affects transfer procedure, mortgage creation and inheritance. Apartment owners under MAOA do not require society share transfer but must comply with association bye laws. The governance model differs significantly between the two systems. Buyers must verify which legal structure applies to their building. Formation of Association of Apartment Owners MAOA requires formation of an Association of Apartment Owners. This association manages common areas, maintenance charges and building administration. The association functions under bye laws annexed to the Declaration. It is not identical to a cooperative society but performs similar administrative roles. Transparent governance and proper record keeping are essential to avoid conflict among owners. Rights of Apartment Owners Under MAOA Apartment owners enjoy exclusive possession of their unit along with undivided interest in common areas such as staircases, lifts, parking and open spaces. Owners have the right to use common facilities subject to compliance with bye laws. They also participate in association decisions and vote on maintenance and administrative matters. Ownership rights are transferable and heritable, subject to registration formalities. Responsibilities and Maintenance Obligations Apartment owners must contribute proportionately to common expenses. Maintenance charges are calculated based on percentage interest defined in the Declaration. Failure to pay dues may result in recovery action by the association. Owners must also comply with building rules and refrain from structural alterations affecting safety or common areas. Clear documentation reduces conflict. Conveyance and Land Ownership Under MAOA One common issue arises where promoters fail to convey land to the association. Proper conveyance ensures collective ownership of land and structure. Delay in conveyance weakens owner rights during redevelopment or litigation. Owners often seek assistance from top real estate lawyers in Mumbai, India to secure conveyance and regularise ownership documentation in complex cases. Legal intervention ensures compliance with statutory obligations. Redevelopment Under MAOA Framework Redevelopment of buildings governed by MAOA requires consent procedures and compliance with property laws. Since ownership is direct rather than share based, consent thresholds differ from cooperative society norms. Clear title and proper Declaration simplify redevelopment negotiations. Ambiguity in common area definition often causes disputes during redevelopment. Careful review of governing documents is critical. Common Legal Disputes Under MAOA Disputes typically arise over maintenance allocation, parking rights, alteration of common areas or improper management by the association. In some cases, promoters register incomplete Declarations leading to confusion regarding ownership percentages. Such disputes may escalate to civil courts. Owners facing complex conflicts often consult best dispute resolution lawyers in Mumbai, India to enforce statutory rights or challenge irregular decisions. Early resolution prevents prolonged litigation. Interaction with RERA and Other Laws For new projects, the promoter must comply with real estate regulatory requirements alongside MAOA. RERA disclosures should align with Declaration details. Discrepancies between RERA registration and MAOA documentation can create legal exposure. Owners must ensure documentation consistency across statutory frameworks. Integrated compliance strengthens ownership security. Transfer and Sale of Apartment Under MAOA Transfer of an apartment requires execution and registration of a sale deed referencing the Deed of Apartment. The undivided interest automatically transfers with the apartment. Unlike cooperative societies, there is no requirement of share certificate endorsement. However, association records must be updated. Proper stamp duty payment and registration remain mandatory. Importance of Legal Review Before Purchase Buyers should verify whether the building is governed by MAOA and review the registered Declaration. Absence of Declaration or incomplete documentation may affect title clarity. Independent legal due diligence is advisable in high value transactions. Clear understanding of governance structure prevents future disputes. Conclusion The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA provides a structured framework for direct apartment ownership in the state. While it offers clarity of title and simplified transfer mechanisms, proper documentation and compliance remain essential. Owners must understand the Declaration, percentage interest and association bye laws to protect their rights. In redevelopment, conveyance or dispute situations, legal clarity under MAOA plays a decisive role. In Maharashtra’s evolving real estate landscape, informed ownership and statutory compliance under MAOA ensure long term security and stability for apartment owners. FAQs on Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA Q1. What is the purpose of Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act MAOA? The Act provides a legal structure for individual apartment ownership along with undivided interest in common areas. Q2. Is MAOA compulsory for all apartment buildings? It applies when the promoter submits the property under the Act through a registered Declaration. Q3. How is MAOA different from cooperative housing society? Under MAOA, owners hold direct title to apartments instead of shares in a society. Q4. Can an apartment be mortgaged under MAOA? Yes. Since ownership is direct, apartments can be mortgaged subject to banking norms. Q5. Who manages the building under MAOA An Association of Apartment Owners manages common areas and administration.
RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay
How to Handle Builder Delays Legally Under RERA Maharashtra?
Buying a home in Maharashtra often involves waiting for construction to complete. However, project delays have historically caused serious financial and emotional stress for buyers. If you are facing a RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay, it is important to understand your legal remedies under the Real Estate Regulation Act. The law provides structured protection for homebuyers, but effective relief depends on timely action and proper documentation. This guide explains how builder delays are treated under RERA Maharashtra, what rights buyers have, how to file complaints, and how to enforce orders legally. Why Builder Delays Are a Common Issue in Maharashtra? Mumbai and other cities in Maharashtra have witnessed rapid real estate expansion. Large redevelopment projects, funding challenges and regulatory approvals often contribute to delays. Before RERA, buyers had limited remedies. Builders frequently revised possession dates without consequence. RERA introduced mandatory project registration, financial discipline and strict disclosure norms to address this imbalance. Today, builder delays are legally actionable under a structured framework. RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay and Buyer Rights RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay cases are governed by the Real Estate Regulation Act and the rules framed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority. Once a project is registered, the promoter must declare a possession timeline. This declared completion date becomes binding. If the builder fails to deliver possession by the committed date, the buyer has two primary remedies. The buyer may continue with the project and claim interest for delay, or withdraw and seek refund with interest and compensation. These rights are statutory and cannot be waived through contract clauses. Understanding the Promised Possession Date The possession date mentioned in the agreement for sale must align with the date declared on the MahaRERA portal. Buyers should verify both before proceeding. If a project receives extension approval from MahaRERA, the revised date becomes relevant. However, extensions must follow due process and cannot be granted arbitrarily. Delays beyond the extended deadline strengthen buyer claims. Interest for Delay Under RERA Maharashtra If the buyer chooses to remain in the project, the promoter must pay interest for each month of delay until possession. The rate of interest is prescribed under Maharashtra RERA rules and is linked to prevailing bank rates. Interest is calculated from the committed possession date until actual handover. This provision compensates buyers for financial burden caused by delay. Refund with Interest for Project Withdrawal Buyers unwilling to wait may withdraw from the project and claim refund of the entire amount paid along with interest. Refund claims are common in severe RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay cases where construction has stalled or financial distress is evident. The promoter is required to refund within the statutory timeline prescribed by the authority. How to File a Complaint Before MahaRERA? Complaints must be filed before the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority through the official online portal. The complaint should include agreement copies, payment receipts, possession commitments and communication records. Clear documentation strengthens the claim. Buyers must articulate delay grounds precisely and request specific relief. After filing, the authority schedules hearings and passes reasoned orders. Time Frame for RERA Proceedings RERA aims to resolve complaints efficiently. Although timelines vary, proceedings are generally faster than traditional civil litigation. Buyers should respond promptly to notices and comply with procedural requirements. Delay in pursuing remedies may weaken negotiating leverage. Timely filing demonstrates seriousness of intent. Execution of RERA Orders Obtaining an order is not always the final step. In some cases, promoters delay compliance even after direction. RERA orders can be enforced as arrears of land revenue. Buyers may initiate recovery proceedings through the authority. Professional guidance from the trusted property law firm and lawyers in Mumbai, India helps structure enforcement strategy where voluntary compliance fails. Force Majeure and Legitimate Extensions Promoters sometimes invoke force majeure to justify delay. RERA permits extension only for genuine reasons such as natural calamities or government restrictions. Economic slowdown or financial mismanagement does not automatically qualify. Buyers must scrutinise extension approvals and underlying reasons. Challenging unjustified extensions may be appropriate in certain cases. Collective Complaints by Multiple Buyers In large projects, delays affect many purchasers. Filing collective complaints may strengthen bargaining power and reduce costs. Group representation often expedites hearings and highlights systemic delay issues. Strategic coordination among buyers improves outcome prospects. Role of Appellate Tribunal If either party is dissatisfied with the order of MahaRERA, an appeal may be filed before the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. Appeals must be filed within the prescribed limitation period. Tribunal decisions carry binding authority and may be further challenged before the High Court. Understanding appellate options is essential in high value disputes. Impact of Insolvency Proceedings In certain cases, builder delay may escalate into insolvency proceedings under bankruptcy law. Once insolvency begins, RERA proceedings may interact with insolvency jurisdiction. Homebuyers are recognised as financial creditors in insolvency cases. This status grants participation rights in resolution processes. Complex cases may require coordinated strategy involving top corporate lawyers in Mumbai, India where corporate restructuring affects buyer remedies. Common Mistakes Buyers Should Avoid Many buyers rely solely on verbal assurances or informal letters extending possession. Such communications may lack legal enforceability. Another common mistake is waiting indefinitely without initiating legal proceedings. Delay weakens negotiating power. Buyers should maintain detailed records of payments and communication from the outset. Negotiated Settlement Versus Litigation In some situations, negotiated settlement may produce faster relief than formal adjudication. However, settlement terms must be documented carefully. Any revised timeline or compensation arrangement should be recorded in writing and signed by authorised representatives. Legal review of settlement terms ensures enforceability. Conclusion RERA Maharashtra Builder Delay cases are not uncommon in a dynamic real estate market. However, the law provides structured remedies to protect buyers against prolonged uncertainty. Understanding statutory rights, monitoring possession timelines and acting promptly are essential steps. RERA has significantly improved accountability, but effective relief depends on informed action and proper documentation. Homebuyers who exercise their rights confidently and strategically are better positioned to secure timely possession or financial recovery. In Maharashtra’s regulated real estate environment, legal awareness remains the strongest defence against builder delay.   Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q1. What qualifies as builder delay under RERA Maharashtra? Delay occurs when possession is not delivered by the committed date without valid extension. Q2. Can buyers claim both possession and compensation? Yes. Buyers may continue in the project and claim interest for delay. Q3. How long does a RERA complaint take? Time varies but proceedings are generally faster than civil court litigation. Q4. Can RERA orders be enforced if builder refuses payment? Yes. Recovery proceedings can be initiated for non-compliance. Q5. Is refund mandatory in case of withdrawal? Yes. The promoter must refund with interest within the statutory period.
Mumbai Property Registration,
Mumbai Property Registration: Key Legal Requirements Every Buyer Should Know’
Property ownership in Mumbai carries high financial and legal stakes. Completing Mumbai property registration correctly is one of the most important steps in securing lawful ownership. Despite this, many buyers treat registration as a routine formality without fully understanding its legal significance. Errors or omissions during registration can lead to disputes, penalties or even loss of ownership rights. This guide explains the legal requirements for property registration in Mumbai, the applicable laws, documentation, stamp duty obligations, registration process and common mistakes buyers should avoid. Why Property Registration Is Legally Critical in Mumbai?  Property registration provides legal recognition to a transaction and records ownership in public records. In Mumbai, registration protects buyers against future ownership claims, fraud and unauthorised transfers. Unregistered property documents have limited evidentiary value in court and may not be enforceable. Registration also enables buyers to access utilities, obtain home loans and carry out future transfers or redevelopment. In a city with complex property histories, registration acts as a safeguard against uncertainty. Mumbai Property Registration and the Legal Framework Mumbai property registration is governed by the Registration Act and the Maharashtra Stamp Act. These laws mandate registration of specified documents and payment of stamp duty before or at the time of registration. The Department of Registration and Stamps, Government of Maharashtra oversees the registration process through Sub Registrar offices across Mumbai. Digital initiatives have streamlined appointments, payments and document uploads, but legal compliance remains essential. Registration does not validate title on its own, but it provides statutory recognition to the transaction. Documents That Require Mandatory Registration Sale deeds, gift deeds, release deeds, exchange deeds and certain development agreements require compulsory registration. Agreements for sale must also be registered under Maharashtra law. Documents creating or extinguishing rights in immovable property must be registered to be legally effective. Failure to register such documents renders them inadmissible as evidence in most legal proceedings. Buyers should ensure all title transferring documents are registered. Stamp Duty and Its Role in Registration Stamp duty is a tax levied on property transactions and is calculated based on market value or agreement value, whichever is higher. Registration cannot proceed without proper stamp duty payment. Incorrect payment attracts penalties and delays. Stamp duty rates vary based on location, nature of transaction and relationship between parties. Buyers should confirm applicable rates and concessions before execution. Who Can Present Documents for Registration? The buyer, seller or their authorised representatives may present documents for registration. Authorisation must be supported by a valid power of attorney. Both parties must appear before the Sub Registrar with identity proof and photographs. Witnesses are also required for execution. Biometric verification is part of the process.  Step by Step Registration Process in Mumbai The process begins with preparation of the final document after payment of stamp duty. Parties then book an appointment at the jurisdictional Sub Registrar office. On the scheduled date, parties execute the document, complete biometric verification and submit supporting documents. Once accepted, the document is registered and a receipt is issued. Certified copies can be obtained later for records. Online Registration Facilities in Maharashtra The Maharashtra government offers online facilities for appointment booking, stamp duty payment and document uploads. This reduces waiting time and improves transparency. However, online systems do not replace legal scrutiny. Buyers must still verify document accuracy, jurisdiction and compliance before submission. Digital convenience does not cure legal defects. Importance of Jurisdiction in Registration Documents must be registered at the Sub Registrar office having jurisdiction over the property location. Registering at the wrong office may invalidate the process. Buyers should confirm jurisdiction before booking appointments. Errors at this stage often cause delays and require fresh execution. Jurisdictional compliance is mandatory. Common Legal Issues During Property Registration Errors in names, property descriptions or consideration amounts are common. Such errors create discrepancies in public records and may require rectification deeds. Failure to include all co-owners or obtain necessary consents leads to incomplete transfers. Disputes often arise when family members or society approvals are overlooked. Attention to detail prevents long-term complications. Role of Housing Societies in Registration For properties in cooperative housing societies, society clearance or transfer forms may be required after registration. Society procedures do not replace statutory registration but affect administrative recognition. Buyers should coordinate with society management to update records post-registration. Clear communication avoids post-transfer disputes. Impact of Registration on Home Loans and Financing Banks require registered documents before disbursing loan amounts. Unregistered agreements delay financing and may affect eligibility. Registration also ensures lenders can create enforceable security interests. Buyers relying on loans should prioritise timely registration. Financial planning must align with legal timelines. Registration in Redevelopment and Under-Construction Projects In under-construction projects, buyers typically register an agreement for sale. The final sale deed is executed after completion. In redevelopment projects, registration confirms allotment rights and future ownership. Buyers should ensure agreements reflect approved plans and timelines. Legal clarity at this stage prevents disputes later. When Legal Advice Becomes Essential High value transactions, inherited properties, redevelopment flats and joint ownership arrangements involve higher legal risk. Professional review helps identify hidden issues. Many buyers engage the best property lawyers in Mumbai, India to review documents, verify compliance and oversee registration to avoid costly mistakes. Early legal support strengthens ownership security. Registration and Corporate or Commercial Property Purchases Commercial property transactions often involve additional compliance such as zoning, taxation and corporate approvals. Registration documents must align with business objectives and regulatory requirements. Companies frequently seek advice from the best corporate lawyers in Mumbai, India to structure transactions, manage risk and ensure enforceability. Commercial registration errors can have significant financial consequences. Conclusion Mumbai property registration is not a procedural formality but a critical legal step that secures ownership rights. Buyers who understand legal requirements, comply with stamp duty laws and verify documentation protect themselves from disputes and financial loss. In Mumbai’s complex real estate environment, informed registration practices provide certainty, enforceability and long-term security. Careful planning and professional guidance ensure that property ownership begins on a strong legal foundation.   FAQs on Mumbai Property Registration Q1. Is property registration mandatory in Mumbai? Yes. Registration is mandatory for documents creating ownership rights. Q2. Can an unregistered agreement be enforced? Unregistered documents have limited enforceability and evidentiary value. Q3. How long does property registration take? The process is usually completed on the same day once documents are ready. Q4. Is online registration legally valid? Yes, provided statutory requirements are met and documents are registered at the correct office. Q5. Can registration be cancelled? Registered documents can be cancelled only through court orders or fresh registered deeds.
verify occupation certificate in Mumbai,
How to Verify Occupation Certificate in Mumbai Online?
Buyers can verify occupation certificates through the official Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation portal. Approved documents and property records are available for public inspection. Verification involves checking property details, building number, approval dates and scope of OC. Buyers should ensure the certificate matches the specific building and flat number. Any discrepancy should be clarified before taking possession or completing payment. Verifying OC Through Physical Records In older buildings or redevelopment projects, digital records may be incomplete. Buyers can verify OC through physical records maintained by the municipal ward office. Certified copies can be requested through formal application. Society records also often contain copies of the OC. Independent verification avoids reliance on developer representations. Legal Risks of Occupying Property Without OC Occupation without OC exposes buyers to enforcement action by municipal authorities. This may include penalties, eviction notices or service disconnections. Properties without OC face difficulties during resale, mortgage and redevelopment. Insurance claims may also be affected in case of damage or accidents. Courts have consistently upheld the importance of OC in property disputes. Impact of OC on Home Loans and Resale Most financial institutions require OC before approving home loans or disbursing final instalments. Absence of OC may restrict financing options. Resale transactions also depend on OC availability. Buyers often refuse properties lacking OC due to legal uncertainty. A verified OC enhances marketability and value. Role of Housing Societies in OC Compliance In cooperative housing societies, managing committees play a role in ensuring OC compliance. Societies must maintain OC records and disclose status during transfers. Society consent does not override statutory requirements. Buyers should independently verify OC even if society records appear in order. Proper record keeping supports transparency. OC Issues in Redevelopment Projects Redevelopment projects often face delays in obtaining OC due to deviations or pending approvals. Existing occupants may be compelled to move in before OC issuance. Such occupation may be legally risky despite possession agreements. Redeveloped buildings without OC face challenges during future redevelopment or conveyance. Legal review of redevelopment agreements helps address OC related risks. When to Seek Legal Assistance OC disputes often arise when builders delay issuance or provide misleading information. Legal notices may be required to compel compliance. Buyers involved in commercial or mixed-use developments may consult a corporate law firm and lawyers in Mumbai to assess regulatory exposure and enforce contractual rights. Legal intervention at the right stage prevents prolonged disputes. Employment and Safety Compliance Considerations For commercial premises, OC verification affects workplace safety and employment compliance. Authorities may inspect OC status during labour or safety audits. Businesses operating from premises without OC risk closure or penalties. In such cases, advice from labour and employment lawyers in Mumbai helps manage regulatory exposure. OC compliance supports lawful business operations. Common Mistakes Buyers Should Avoid Many buyers assume possession letters or utility connections imply OC compliance. This assumption is incorrect. Another common error is failing to verify partial OC scope. Buyers must ensure coverage applies to their specific premises. Avoiding shortcuts protects long-term ownership rights. Conclusion To verify occupation certificate in Mumbai is a critical step for every property buyer and occupant. OC confirms regulatory compliance, safety and lawful occupation. Skipping verification exposes buyers to financial and legal risk. Whether purchasing a new flat, entering redevelopment or acquiring commercial premises, OC verification should never be overlooked. In Mumbai’s regulated real estate environment, due diligence and legal awareness remain the strongest safeguards for secure property ownership. FAQs on Occupation Certificate in Mumbai Q1. Is occupation certificate mandatory in Mumbai? Yes. OC is mandatory for lawful occupation of buildings. Q2. Can buyers occupy flats without OC? Occupation without OC is unauthorised and carries legal risk. Q3. How long does it take to obtain OC? Timelines vary based on compliance and inspections. Delays are common where deviations exist. Q4. Does OC expire? No. Once issued, OC remains valid unless revoked for violations. Q5. Can society apply for OC? Generally, the builder applies. Societies may apply in limited circumstances for older buildings.
MHCO Updates
Litigation Update
LITIGATION UPDATE I SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES LIMITATION LAW FOR POSSESSION SUITS BASED ON VOID SALE DEEDS
Contributors: Mr Akash Jain, Associate Partner Mr Divyang Salvi, Associate The Supreme Court of India in Shanti Devi v. Jagan Devi & Ors. (2025 SCC OnLine SC 1961) has clarified that when a property ownership dispute arises from a sale deed that is void ab initio, the lawful owner can file for possession within twelve years under Article 65 of the Limitation Act. The ruling distinguishes void from voidable documents, streamlining the remedy for owners whose property rights are threatened by fraudulent transfers and reinforcing robust legal protection for genuine titleholders. Facts in Brief: The case involved a longstanding dispute over agricultural land in Haryana (“Suit property”). The Plaintiffs asserted ownership of a one-third share in land, alleging that the Defendant’s possession was based on a fraudulent sale deed dated 1973, which the alleged seller (Plaintiff) had never executed. The Plaintiffs sought permanent injunction, or in the alternative, joint possession of the land, and a declaration that the sale deed was void after 11 years. The Trial Court dismissed their suit, but the first Appellate Court and the High Court ruled in their favour. The Defendant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the suit was time-barred and that the Plaintiffs failed to prove fraud or lack of execution of the deed. Supreme Court Findings: The Supreme Court confined itself to the issue of whether the Plaintiff’s suit was time-barred. It held that the suit, though filed eleven years after the impugned sale deed, was governed by Article 65 of the Limitation Act. The Court explained that suits for possession based on title are maintainable within twelve years when the impugned sale deed is void ab initio, and not merely voidable. The Court stressed that in such a case, the original owner’s right is not affected by a fraudulent or forged instrument, and there is no requirement to seek its cancellation within Article 59’s three-year window. The Court also highlighted the difference between fraud relating to the ‘character’ of a document (which renders it void) and as to its contents (which may make it voidable). Evidence clearly showed the Plaintiff never executed the deed or received consideration, confirming the judgment of the Lower Appellate Courts in the Plaintiff’s favour. Impact: This ruling clarifies the limitation law applicable in cases of fraudulent property transfers and offers practical assurance to property owners facing similar circumstances. The decision enables owners to challenge unlawful possession based on forged or fraudulent documents for up to twelve years after adverse possession begins, expanding access to remedy. By reinforcing the distinction between void and voidable transactions, the Court’s decision will streamline property litigation and strengthen legal certainty in title disputes. Stakeholders—in particular, landowners—must ensure careful record-keeping and timely action if their property rights are infringed by such transactions. MHCO Comment: The Supreme Court’s approach brings much-needed clarity to real estate litigation involving fraudulent sale deeds. By recognising the extended limitation window for actions based on void documents and minimising procedural hurdles, the ruling affirms substantive justice and legal security for legitimate landowners. The judgment will promote diligence, transparency, and fair outcomes in property disputes, contributing to overall real estate market stability in India.
Gaming Law Update
GAMING LAW UPDATE: PROMOTION AND REGULATION OF ONLINE GAMING ACT, 2025
Contributors: Mr Bhushan Shah, Partner, Ms Shreya Dalal, Associate Partner Mr Abhishek Nair, Associate On 22 August 2025, the Central Government enacted the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (“Gaming Act”). The Bill was passed by Parliament with remarkable speed, within seven minutes in the Lok Sabha and twenty-six minutes in the Rajya Sabha, before receiving Presidential assent the following day. The Gaming Act provides for the promotion of e-sports and online social games, while prohibiting online money games involving stakes or wagers for monetary gain. It also establishes a regulatory authority to oversee the sector and sets out stringent penalties for violations. Recognition and Promotion of E-Sports and Social Games The Gaming Act empowers the Central Government to formally recognise e-sports as a legitimate competitive sport. It may issue guidelines, establish training academies, provide incentives, and coordinate with States to promote such activities. Online social games designed for entertainment or educational purposes and not involving monetary stakes are also to be facilitated through registration mechanisms, awareness initiatives, and institutional support programmes. Definitions under the Act The Act introduces the following key definitions: Online game: any game offered on a digital platform. E-sport: skill-based competitive events without wagering. Online social game: non-wagering, entertainment, or skill-development based online games. Online money game: any game involving fees, deposits, or stakes in expectation of monetary or equivalent returns, excluding e-sports. Recognition and Promotion of E-Sports and Social Games The Gaming Act empowers the Central Government to recognise e-sports as a legitimate competitive sport through guidelines, training academies, incentives, and coordination with States. Both e-sports and online social games are subject to registration with the designated Authority, which may impose technical and playerprotection standards. Online social games for entertainment or educational purposes without monetary stakes will be promoted through registration mechanisms, awareness initiatives, and institutional support. Prohibition of Online Money Games The Gaming Act imposes a complete prohibition on offering, operating, advertising, or participating in online money games, including those offered from foreign jurisdictions. Banks and financial institutions are also prohibited from facilitating related transactions. Penalties for violations: Up to three years’ imprisonment and fines up to ₹1 crore for offering online money games or facilitating funds for online money games. Up to two years’ imprisonment and fines up to ₹50 lakh for advertising online money games. Enhanced punishments for repeat offences. Non-compliance with directions may lead to penalties up to ₹10 lakh, suspension, or cancellation of registration. Offences under the prohibition of online money games are cognizable and non-bailable, and company officers may also be held liable. The Act further empowers investigation, search, and seizure (including of digital resources), and blocking of non-compliant services. Authority and Regulatory Oversight The Central Government may establish or designate an Authority to classify games, register permissible ones, address complaints, and issue directions. MHCO Comment The Gaming Act provides a comprehensive framework for the regulation of online gaming in India. It balances the encouragement of e-sports and social games with stringent restrictions on money-based gaming. However, the Gaming Act has already had a disruptive impact on the industry as leading platforms such as WinZO, Dream11, MPL, and PokerBaazi have already suspended their real-money offerings immediately following the enactment of the said Act, in a sector employing over 20 million people. By effectively shutting down the largest revenue-generating segment of the online gaming industry, the Gaming Act is eroding the growth in the sector. We believe that the Central Government ought to have issued market policy consultation papers and taken public comments before drastically resorting to passing the Gaming Act in such a hasty manner.  
LITIGATION UPDATE
LITIGATION UPDATE: INDIVIDUALS LIABILITY IN CASE OF ONE PERSON COMPANY
Contributors:  Mr. Bhushan Shah, Partner Mr. Aakash Mehta, Senior Associate On 3 July 2025, the High Court of Bombay passed an Order setting aside directions passed by Arbitral Tribunal imposing personal liability on sole shareholder of One Person Company (OPC). FACTS Innovative Film Academy Private Limited (“Innovative”), is a One Person Company (“OPC”) incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 2013 formed by Mr. Saravana Prasad as its sole shareholder. Innovative entered into a Production Agreement dated 10 March 2021 (“Agreement”) with Endemol India Private Limited (“Endemol”) to produce episodes of the television show “Masterchef” in Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, and Malayalam. Endemol delivered the Tamil and Telugu episodes and raised invoices totaling approximately ₹15.93 crores, of which ₹4.45 crores was paid and ₹1.08 crores was adjusted against other dues, leaving an outstanding balance of approximately ₹10.40 crores. Disputes over these dues which lead to arbitral proceedings in turn resulting in the impugned interim order. The Arbitral Tribunal directed both Innovative and Prasad to: deposit ₹10.40 crores in a fixed deposit in a nationalized bank; disclose all assets (movable and immovable) and all encumbrances, charges and attachment on such assets since March 2019; disclose details of all companies and firms in which they are shareholders, directors or partners and the extent of their interest in such enterprises; disclose all income-tax returns since March 2019 along with the profit and loss account and all ledger statements along with narrations; and disclose details of all bank accounts held by them since March 2019. Innovative and Prasad challenged these directions, arguing that imposing personal obligations on Prasad violated the limited liability framework of OPC under the Companies Act, 2013. ISSUE Does the limited liability of an OPC mean that the sole shareholder is not personally liable? JUDGMENT The High Court held that the order passed by Arbitral Tribunal erred in treating Innovative and Prasad as one entity, disregarding the legal distinction between an OPC and its sole shareholder. The Court pointed out that under Section 2(62) of the Companies Act, 2013, an OPC is a distinct juridical entity with limited liability, shielding the sole shareholder (Prasad) from personal liability for the company’s obligations. The Court further emphasized that the concept of OPC is inspired by global practices (e.g., in the EU, USA, UK, China, and Singapore), and was designed to ring-fence personal assets from business liabilities. The Arbitral Tribunal’s directions against Prasad, including the deposit and disclosures, conflicted with this fundamental policy of Indian law. The Court further opined that that Prasad’s actions as the signatory to contracts or correspondence would not make him personally liable and such a view would undermine the statutory OPC framework. The Court further held the Arbitral Tribunal’s direction for Innovative to deposit monies in a fixed deposit is a balanced approach which protects Endemol’s interests without depriving Innovative of control over the funds. The Bombay High Court partially allowed the appeals with ruling that the directions imposing obligations on Saravana Prasad for the deposit and disclosures were set aside as they violated the limited liability protections of OPC under the Companies Act, 2013. The Bombay High Court further held that the directions against Innovative, including the fixed deposit and disclosures of its assets, liabilities, and interests, were upheld as just and equitable interim measures. The Court also clarified that its observations were not intended to influence the final arbitration outcome. MHCO COMMENT In our opinion, this judgment strengthens the legal framework laid out in the Companies Act, 2013 for One Person Companies in India, affirming that sole shareholders cannot be held personally liable for company obligations unless there are specific contractual or factual grounds that justify the same. The order provides clarity for entrepreneurs using the OPC structure, ensuring their personal assets remain protected. The decision also underscores the judiciary’s restraint in interfering with arbitral orders unless they are violative of fundamental legal principles.
Real Estate Update
REAL ESTATE UPDATE: MAINTENANCE LEVY IN CONDOMINIUMS
Authors: Purvi Asher, Partner and Karishma Maheshwari, Associate This case concerns a recent decision dated 4 August 2025 by the Bombay High Court in the case of Sachin Malpani and Ors. vs. Nilam Patil and Ors. The writ petition questioned the method of levying maintenance charges in a registered condominium under the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970 (“the Act”), and challenged the jurisdiction of the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies in directing such charges to be apportioned based on undivided share. Brief Facts The petition stemmed from a dispute in the ‘Treasure Park’ condominium comprising 356 apartments. The petitioners, owning larger apartments (3BHK, 4BHK), objected to an order by the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Pune, dated 8 July 2021, which directed that maintenance charges be levied proportionate to the undivided share of each owner, instead of the previously prevailing equal charge. The challenge was rejected by the Co-operative Court on 13 May 2022, prompting the present writ petition. Issues for Adjudication The core issues for adjudication were:   Whether the Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies had jurisdiction under the Act to pass such orders. What is the correct method of levying maintenance charges- equal across apartments or proportionate to undivided share in common areas, as prescribed by law and the condominium’s Deed of Declaration. Held The Bombay High Court held that: Notifications issued by the State Government validly conferred powers of the Registrar under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 onto the District Deputy Registrar, thus justifying the order's jurisdiction. The Deed of Declaration provisions and Sections 6 and 10 of the Act require that both common profits and common expenses be distributed among apartment owners in proportion to their undivided interest. The impugned resolutions and past practice of equal maintenance do not override statutory requirements; apartment owners with a higher undivided share must contribute proportionally to common expenses. Relief The Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding both the Deputy Registrar’s order dated 8 July 2021, and the Co-operative Court’s order dated 13 May 2022. The petitioners’ challenge was rejected, confirming the requirement of proportionate maintenance charges. MHCO Comment This judgment clarifies the application of the Act in the context of maintenance contribution in registered condominiums, emphasizing statutory compliance over majority resolutions. It confirms that statutory covenants in the Deed of Declaration and the Act must govern apportionment of expenses, ensuring fairness in financial obligations shared among owners according to their interest, preventing disproportionate burdens on smaller flat owners and aligning practice with the law.
LIFE AT MHCO
Need Help? Chat with us