Maharashtra co-op court: Nepean Sea Road flat owner cannot stop society from repairing common chajjas

A Nepean Sea Road flat ownerrsquos bid to stop his housing society from repairing the chajjas outside his flats has failed with the Maharashtra State Cooperative Appellate Court holding that the external structural slabs are common areas that can be maintained by the societyIn a judgment pronounced on September 10 President Sau S Sapatnekar dismissed the memberrsquos appeal with costs and upheld a Cooperative Court order allowing the society to proceed with the repairsThe dispute involved two flats in D Wing on the 17th and 19th floors The society said repairs were required because of leakage and seepage affecting flats below The court also considered the societyrsquos repair programme approved through its general body and noted that its repair budget had been increased from Rs 75 lakh to Rs 2 crorepopcorn numberSep 10 descDay the judgment was pronounced classDefaultThe court also clarified the limits of a memberrsquos right to inspect society records under Section 154B8 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies ActWhat started the disputeThe flat owner approached the Cooperative Court after the societyrsquos contractor removed safety grills installed on the chajjas outside his flats during repair work He said the grills had been installed in 2006 because the buildingrsquos coastal location exposed it to moisture and saline air He claimed the chajjas were structurally sound and that the society had never objected to the grillsThe grills were removed on November 15 2024 according to his complaint He later objected to a safety net installed over the chajjas saying it obstructed ventilation to an airconditioning unit He sought an interim order stopping the society from demolishing renovating adding to or repairing the chajjas attached to his flats The society opposed the plea saying the chajjas were common areas and that repairs were necessary because of leakage seepage and structural concernsWhy court backed societyThe appellate court held that the external chajjas formed part of the buildingrsquos common areas and were not the private property of individual flat owners The court noted that it lies outside the flat The key point Ownership of a flat does not by itself give the member exclusive ownership of external structural portions of the buildingEvidence of leakageThe society produced a repair action plan dated December 28 2024For one of the flats the plan includedgtgt Repairing a cracked chajjagtgt Waterproofing to address leakagegtgt Assessing possible beam damageThe society also produced photographs showing seepage and leakage allegedly affecting flats below The court noted that the repair programme had been discussed and approved in general body meetings and that the appellant had not challenged those resolutionsWhy the injunction was refusedThe timing of the challenge was another factorOctober 2023 Repair work commenced according to the judgment2025 The appellant approached the Cooperative Court seeking to stop the workThe appellate court considered the delay relevant while deciding whether interim protection should be granted and held that the appellant was not entitled to an injunction stopping the repairsWhat about the structural reportsThe flat owner had sought several documents relating to the repairs includinggtgt Structural audit reportgtgt Technical assessmentsgtgt Permissions and clearancesgtgt General body meeting minutesgtgt Contractor and engineer reportsgtgt Correspondence relating to the repairsThe court considered these requests under Section 154B8 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies ActThe provision gives members the right to inspect documents including the societyrsquos byelaws audited accounts register of members and minutes of general and committee meetings It also provides for copies of the specified documents on written request and payment of the prescribed feeThe court held that this statutory right does not amount to an unrestricted right to demand every technical or structural document held by a societyThe final orderThe appellate court found no reason to interfere with the Cooperative Courtrsquos August 4 2025 orderAppeal DismissedCosts Imposed on appellantLower court order ConfirmedHowever the appellate court clarified that the trial court must decide the pending interim application on its own merits and should not be influenced by observations made in the appellate judgmentCourt ruling What it meansChajjas External chajjas were treated by the court as common areas of the societyRepairs A society can undertake maintenance and repairs of such common structural portionsFlat ownership Owning a flat does not automatically mean owning the buildingrsquos external structural elementsRecords Members have statutory inspection rights under Section 154B8 but those rights cover specified records rather than every technical documentSociety resolutions General bodyapproved repair decisions were an important factor considered by the courtDelay The delay in challenging the repair work was relevant to the request for interim relief