Site icon Raw Law

Calcutta High Court Directs Competent Authority to Decide Apartment Ownership Dispute Without Disruption of Power and Access, Emphasises “Authority Shall Not Enter Into Private Disputes But Act Under the Act” Amidst Allegations of Non-Payment of Maintenance and Denial of Rights

apartment ownership
Share this article

Court’s Decision

The Calcutta High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the competent authority under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 to hear and decide the petitioners’ representation after granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing to all necessary parties, including proforma respondents, and to pass a reasoned order communicated to all parties. Until such a decision is made and communicated, the Court restrained the association from disturbing the electricity supply or obstructing the ingress and egress of the petitioners. The Court clarified that the competent authority shall restrict its consideration to issues under the Act and shall not enter into private civil disputes between the parties.


Facts

The petitioners approached the Calcutta High Court seeking relief similar to that granted on 11 June 2025 in Mita Doss & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors. They submitted that they had approached the competent authority under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 regarding disputes with the association and requested the Court to direct the authority to adjudicate upon their grievances after providing them an opportunity of hearing. The respondent association opposed the petition, arguing that the petitioners were not on the same footing as Mita Doss since they were allegedly not paying maintenance charges. The Court noted that the petitioners’ representation before the competent authority had been pending for a considerable period.


Issues


Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioners argued that their dispute with the apartment owners’ association was already pending before the competent authority under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, and that they were entitled to relief similar to that granted in the Mita Doss matter. They asserted their right to have the matter adjudicated by the competent authority and requested that the association be restrained from obstructing essential services and access in the interim.


Respondent’s Arguments

The association opposed the relief sought, contending that the petitioners were not on the same footing as the petitioners in Mita Doss, primarily alleging that the petitioners had defaulted on maintenance payments. It argued that this default justified the association’s actions and differentiated the present case from Mita Doss.


Analysis of the Law

The Court applied the framework under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, emphasising that the competent authority has jurisdiction to resolve disputes arising under the Act and that such statutory mechanisms should be utilised to settle disputes concerning the rights and obligations of apartment owners. The Court also considered the principles of fair hearing, essential services protection, and the necessity to maintain status quo to prevent irreparable harm during the pendency of adjudication.


Precedent Analysis


Court’s Reasoning

The Court observed that since the petitioners’ representation had been pending before the competent authority for a considerable period, it was appropriate to direct the authority to adjudicate after providing an opportunity of hearing to all stakeholders, including the association and proforma respondents. The Court further reasoned that to prevent irreparable harm, the petitioners should not be deprived of essential services like electricity supply and free access to their apartments while the matter is under adjudication. However, the Court made it clear that the competent authority should not entertain private disputes unrelated to the Act while resolving the present grievance.


Conclusion

The Calcutta High Court:
1. Directed the competent authority to hear and decide the petitioners’ issues under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, with a reasoned order to be communicated to all parties.

2. Restrained the association from obstructing electricity supply or the petitioners’ ingress and egress pending the decision.

3. Clarified that the competent authority should confine itself to issues under the Act and avoid adjudicating private disputes.


Implications


Short Note on Referred Case

Mita Doss & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors. (Order dated 11 June 2025):
The Calcutta High Court in Mita Doss directed the competent authority to adjudicate disputes under the Apartment Ownership Act while restraining associations from cutting power or blocking access during adjudication, establishing procedural fairness and protection of essential services for residents.


FAQs

  1. Can apartment associations cut electricity or restrict entry for non-payment of maintenance in West Bengal?

No, the Calcutta High Court has restrained associations from disrupting power supply or access while disputes are pending before the competent authority under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act.

  1. What relief did the Calcutta High Court grant to apartment owners in disputes with associations?

The Court directed the competent authority to decide the disputes after hearing all parties while ensuring uninterrupted essential services and free access to apartments during adjudication.

  1. Does the competent authority handle private disputes under the Apartment Ownership Act?

No, the Court clarified that the competent authority is to limit its scope to matters under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act and cannot adjudicate unrelated private civil disputes.

Also Read: Gujarat High Court Allows Release of Vehicle Seized Under Prohibition Act: “No Confiscation Proceedings Initiated, Vehicle Should Not Be Left to Rot in Police Custody”

Exit mobile version