The Bombay High Court has restrained new developers from carrying out construction on a CIDCO-allotted plot in Ulwe, Navi Mumbai, after holding that earlier developers who had invested over ₹3.12 crore in the project deserved interim protection.
Justice Milind N. Jadhav, while allowing Appeal From Order No. 479 of 2025, set aside a trial court order and granted a temporary injunction in favour of Sunil Narayan Patil and partners of Anita Developers, who are seeking specific performance of development agreements executed more than a decade ago.
The Ulwe Plot and the Original Allotment
The dispute centres around Plot No. 37 (earlier Plot No. 57) located at Sector 9, Ulwe, Panvel, Raigad district, earmarked for allotment by CIDCO under the State Government’s 12.5% land compensation scheme.
In December 2007, CIDCO issued a Letter of Intent in favour of a group of original landowners led by Pundalik Balaji Gharat, along with other members of the Gharat family.
Early Agreements and Entry of Developers
In February 2010, the landowners entered into an agreement with Ashok Patil and Ramesh Patil, granting them authority to deal with and develop the proposed CIDCO plot for a consideration of ₹2.25 crore.
Subsequently, on 26 February 2013, Ashok Patil and Ramesh Patil executed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Anita Developers, a partnership firm represented by Sunil Narayan Patil and others.
As per court records, between 2013 and 2020, Anita Developers paid approximately ₹3.12 crore to the original landowners and their legal heirs through banking channels.
CIDCO Lease and New Developers Enter the Scene
CIDCO eventually executed a lease deed in November 2022 in favour of the original landowners.
In April 2023, the landowners entered into a tripartite agreement with CIDCO and a new set of developers — Shree Sai Developers, represented by Mahesh Patil and Suresh Patil — who claimed development rights and began construction activity on the Ulwe plot.
This prompted Anita Developers to file Special Civil Suit No. 93 of 2024 in the Panvel civil court, seeking specific performance of the earlier agreements and an injunction against further development.
Trial Court Refuses Relief
The trial court refused to grant interim relief, holding that the 2013 MOU in favour of Anita Developers was not signed directly by the original landowners and therefore did not create enforceable rights.
Challenging this finding, Anita Developers approached the Bombay High Court.
High Court: Payments and Conduct Cannot Be Ignored
Allowing the appeal, Justice Jadhav observed that:
- ₹3.12 crore had indisputably been paid by Anita Developers to the landowners and their legal heirs
- The landowners did not deny receipt of money, and several of them chose not to contest the proceedings
- Ashok Patil and Ramesh Patil admitted execution of the agreements and receipt of consideration
The Court noted that the 2010 agreement expressly authorised Ashok Patil and Ramesh Patil to create third-party rights, under which the 2013 MOU with Anita Developers was executed.
New Developers Failed Due Diligence
The High Court was critical of Shree Sai Developers, holding that they failed to carry out basic due diligence before entering into the 2023 tripartite agreement.
The Court ruled that the new developers could not claim the status of bona fide purchasers, especially when substantial payments, agreements, and long-standing claims existed in favour of Anita Developers.
Injunction Granted
Holding that all parameters for interim relief were satisfied, the High Court:
- Set aside the Panvel trial court order dated 13 June 2025
- Granted a temporary injunction
- Directed all parties to maintain status quo
- Restrained Shree Sai Developers from developing, selling, or creating third-party rights on the Ulwe plot until final disposal of the suit
Why This Order Is Important
Legal observers say the ruling is significant for:
- CIDCO allotment disputes in Ulwe, Panvel, and Navi Mumbai
- Cases where developers invest large sums before formal lease execution
- Emphasising that courts will examine conduct, payments, and due diligence, not just technical signatures
The order sends a strong signal that later CIDCO leases do not automatically override earlier contractual rights, especially when money has already changed hands.
Also Read: CIDCO fulfils dreams of 4158 home buyers
