In a strongly worded order that will resonate with thousands of cooperative housing society members across Maharashtra, the Maharashtra State Co-operative Appellate Court, Mumbai, on 18 July 2026 dismissed the appeal of Landmark Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Dadar, and protected a senior citizen member from arbitrary daily penalties.
The Court upheld the interim relief granted by the Co-operative Court No. III, Mumbai, restraining the society from collecting ₹200 per day as parking penalty and directing it to allot one convenient parking slot to the member within 15 days.
Mrs. Deepali Dilip Bhube, a senior citizen residing in Flat No. B-1004 of the society, had been allotted parking slot P-1-19 at Level P1 by the builder in 2011. Over the years the slot became completely sandwiched between other vehicles due to unauthorised additions, making it nearly impossible to park or remove her car without help. Despite repeated written complaints, the society took no action. Instead, it began imposing a harsh daily fine of ₹200 for parking in the open space and even demanded ₹1,800 for just nine days through a letter dated 28 January 2025.
The Co-operative Court had earlier restrained the society from collecting this daily penalty and ordered allotment of a usable parking space pending final disposal of the dispute. The society challenged that order claiming it was under an administrator and was unaware of the case. The Appellate Court rejected this excuse after examining the roznamas, which clearly showed that the society’s advocate and representative had appeared on multiple dates before the interim order was passed.
The heart of the judgment lies in Model Bye-law 165(a).
The Appellate Court specifically reminded societies that Model Bye-law 165(a) of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Model Bye-laws places a strict ceiling: no penalty of any kind on a member can exceed ₹5,000 in an entire financial year. Before imposing even this limited penalty, two mandatory steps are required:
- Proper written notice must first be given to the member alleging the breach.
- A resolution approving the penalty must be passed in the General Body Meeting.
In this case, neither condition was fulfilled. There was also no justification on record for a daily penalty of ₹200 that would have easily crossed the annual limit many times over.
The Court observed that the senior citizen was facing continuous physical inconvenience, mental harassment and financial pressure. On the other side, the society would suffer no real prejudice if one proper parking slot was temporarily earmarked as per the sanctioned plan and bye-laws. Finding a clear prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss in the member’s favour, the Appellate Court dismissed the society’s appeal with costs to be borne by each party.
This ruling sends a clear message: cooperative societies cannot treat daily fines as a revenue tool or a weapon of harassment. Any penalty – whether for parking, maintenance, or any other alleged breach – must strictly remain within the ₹5,000 yearly ceiling and follow the due process laid down in Model Bye-law 165(a). Failure to do so will not survive judicial scrutiny.
Also Read: Developers Mandated to Execute Conveyance Deed Within 3 Months of Occupancy Certificate
