04 July,2026 07:30 AM IST | Mumbai | Vinod Kumar Menon
Vehicle clamping can be undertaken by a housing society only after issuing a 48-hour prior written notice. Representation Pic/iStock
Reinforcing the authority of co-operative housing societies to regulate common amenities, the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court has 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.
In a 16-page judgment delivered on July 1, President SS Sapatnekar upheld an earlier order of Co-operative Court No. 3, Mumbai, permitting the society to clamp wrongly parked vehicles, provided it first issues a 48-hour written notice stating clear reasons for the action.
The appeal arose from an interim order passed on February 26, 2026, in a dispute between the flat owners and the society. The appellate court refused to interfere with the lower court's interim order, observing that the trial court had exercised its discretion judiciously and had already balanced the interests of both parties by imposing procedural safeguards before any coercive action could be taken.
The court confirmed that vehicle clamping can be undertaken only after issuing a 48-hour prior written notice; the notice must contain recorded and cogent reasons, and the interim protection granted by the trial court remains valid until the final disposal of the dispute.
The society delayed granting membership, they were subjected to harassment, additional financial demands were imposed, and parking restrictions were unfairly enforced.
>> Collected Rs 5000 towards legal document verification
>> Accepted Rs 1.50 lakh in cash as a welfare fund donation
>> Levied an alleged illegal parking penalty of Rs 86,138
>> Refused additional parking despite allegedly having numerous vacant parking spaces
>> Constructed a community hall, kitchen and laundry rooms in areas allegedly reserved for parking
They also sought
>> Removal of the alleged unauthorised constructions
>> Refund of amounts allegedly collected unlawfully
During the appellate hearing, the appellants clarified that they were not pressing their interim prayers seeking additional parking spaces or a waiver of parking penalties. Instead, the appeal was confined solely to challenging the Trial Court's permission allowing the society to clamp unauthorised vehicles.
The housing society argued thatâ¦
Parking areas continue to remain under the developer as conveyance has not yet been executed
The society neither allots nor sells parking spaces
Flat purchasers obtained parking directly from the developer
Members cannot claim multiple parking spaces as a matter of right
General Body approved strict parking rules
The society relied upon resolutions passed at an extraordinary general body meeting (EGBM) held on May 5, 2025. The resolutions approved
>> Rs 500 per day penalty for unauthorised parking.
>> Clamping of vehicles that remain wrongly parked despite prior intimation.
>> Disciplinary proceedings against members allegedly causing repeated disturbances.
The society argued that these resolutions were never challenged and therefore remain legally binding.
The Appellate Court observed that
General Body resolutions represent the collective will of members
Courts should ordinarily not interfere unless resolutions are illegal or beyond jurisdiction
The appellants had never challenged the validity of the May 5, 2025, resolution
Consequently, the parking resolution continues to bind all members
The appellate court referred to judicial precedents holding that
Co-operative societies enjoy constitutional autonomy
Courts should avoid unnecessary interference in their internal affairs
Validly passed resolutions under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act deserve implementation.
Members' rights are governed by the Act, the society's bye-laws and General Body resolutions.
Such resolutions remain binding unless set aside by a competent judicial forum.
The dispute involves flat owners Nirmal Ajayraj Sottany and Rushek Nirmal Sottany, who purchased Flat No. 1501 in Magnum Tower through a Punjab National Bank auction. They claimed that they had cleared maintenance dues of approximately Rs 3 lakh, paid a transfer fee of Rs 25,000, and obtained a no-due certificate from the developer.
[popcorn number="July 1" desc="Day judgment was delivered" class="Default"]
