Supreme Court Caps Deemed Conveyance In Multi-Society Layout, Redraws Boundaries For Equitable Redevelopment
Apex Court Upholds Torana CHS Rights But Tightens Guardrails To Prevent Land Over-Allocation In Cluster Projects
In a landmark governance-aligned intervention, the Supreme Court of India has recalibrated the operational scope of deemed conveyance across multi-society layouts, issuing a high-impact order that blends regulatory compliance with urban-renewal pragmatism. The ruling, delivered on 10 November 2025, resolves a festering contention between Jaydeep Developers and Torana Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., a keystone entity within a 10,000 sq. m. Andheri East cluster struggling toward redevelopment under volatile FSI expectations and pending audits.
At the heart of the dispute was Torana’s unilateral deemed conveyance certificate—a document the society secured from the District Deputy Registrar in March 2025, claiming 2,120.25 sq. m. of land, including open spaces and internal roads. The promoter, however, argued this quantum exceeded Torana’s built-up entitlement and jeopardized the collective redevelopment potential for over 1,200 residents across adjacent societies.
The Bombay High Court had upheld Torana’s rights in May 2025, but the developer escalated the conflict to the apex court, flagging structural fragmentation, loss of shared amenities, and adverse impacts on a C-1 audit earmarked for the cluster.
Court Draws Firm Line Between Autonomy And Overreach
In a decisive yet calibrated move, the Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4567 of 2025, endorsing the High Court’s position while strategically downsizing the extent of land conveyance.
The bench underscored that while MOFA Section 11(3) empowers societies to obtain unilateral conveyance when promoters default, this empowerment cannot morph into disproportionate land capture. The Court clarified that conveyance must reflect proportionate built-up share, not opportunistic annexation of common zones that belong to the entire layout ecosystem.
Referencing distinctions with the high-profile Marathon Era CHS vs. Competent Authority (2024), the Court noted that “over-grants” harmful to cluster governance are untenable—especially in high-stakes redevelopment corridors such as Andheri.
The ruling also invoked regulatory synergies: RERA Section 17 demands title clarity before rehabilitation, yet over-vesting risks triggering cascading civil disputes. To strike equilibrium, the Court capped Torana’s conveyance at 1,650 sq. m., integrating a 15% setback buffer consistent with the 2018 Government Resolution that seeks to prevent fragmentation in Mumbai’s 3,000+ aging clusters.
Directives: Compliance, Escrow, And Governance Audits
To operationalize its intent, the Supreme Court issued a suite of compliance-oriented mandates:
- 1,650 sq. m. final conveyance to be regularized within 60 days, excluding pure common areas.
- Mandatory revenue department verification of boundaries.
- ₹2 crore escrow by Torana CHS to address shared-facility disputes — funds to be released once a federation for the entire layout is formed.
- Prohibition on future over-grants without third-party audits.
- ₹50,000 cost imposed on Jaydeep Developers for procedural delays, earmarked for Torana’s rehabilitation corpus.
- MahaRERA tasked with monitoring the cluster’s redevelopment tenders and ensuring minimum 70% consent for FSI unlocks.
These orders reflect an emerging regulatory model that favors “cluster-first governance,” ensuring compliance hygiene while enabling societies to break free from decade-long redevelopment paralysis.
A New Roadmap For Mumbai’s Stalled Projects
This judgment is widely expected to ripple across Mumbai, where 1,500+ stalled redevelopment projects hinge on land clarity and inter-society coordination. By codifying proportionality caps and embedding audit prerequisites, the Supreme Court has effectively set a nationwide precedent for urban renewal governance.
For the 4,000+ societies in Andheri, the verdict clarifies long-contested norms around conveyance, proportionate vesting, and shared commons — thereby reducing litigation load and facilitating faster deployment of self-redevelopment tenders.
While the Court reaffirmed that societies cannot be indefinitely throttled by non-performing promoters, it also insulated multi-society clusters from predatory overreach, delivering a rare dual win for autonomy and equitable land stewardship.
