'Merely Giving Inaccurate Information Not Misrepresentation': Bombay High Court Quashes De-Registration Of 45-Year-Old Housing Society

The Bombay High Court has held that the mere act of providing inaccurate or incomplete information does not amount to "misrepresentation" under Section 21A of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. The Court observed that de-registration of a society can be ordered only where the registration itself was obtained through misrepresentation by the applicants, and not on the basis of subsequent events or an alleged error in the Registrar's decision.

Justice Sandeep V. Marne was hearing a writ petition filed by Elite Diagnostic Center Pvt. Ltd. challenging the order of the Minister (Co-operation) setting aside the Divisional Joint Registrar's decision directing de-registration of Krishna Kunj Co-operative Housing Society, which had been registered in 1981. The petitioner claimed ownership of the land on which the society's building stood and sought de-registration on the ground that the society had been registered by misrepresentation. The society opposed the petition, contending that the scope of Section 21A was limited to examining whether the registration had been obtained by misrepresentation and that none of the allegations relied upon by the petitioner satisfied that requirement.

The Court observed that the power of de-registration under Section 21A is available only in the limited circumstances specified in the statute and that the expression "misrepresentation" cannot be interpreted as conferring an appellate power upon the Registrar over the original decision granting registration. It held that the alleged title disputes, proceedings relating to unauthorised construction, and rejection of the society's deemed conveyance application were events occurring long after registration of the society and, therefore, could not constitute misrepresentation at the time of registration.

The Court further observed that the Registrar considering an application for registration is neither required nor empowered to adjudicate disputes relating to title over the property.

Dealing with the contention that only six flats existed and that garage occupiers could not have been treated as members for satisfying the statutory requirement of ten members, the Court noted that the application for registration had expressly disclosed the existence of six flats and four garages. It held that mere inaccurate or incomplete information does not amount to misrepresentation.

“… mere act of providing inaccurate or incomplete information does not amount to misrepresentation under Section 21A. To constitute misrepresentation, there needs to be deliberate deception, suppression of facts or presentation of forged or fabricated documents,” the Court observed.

The Court also observed that the society had functioned for forty-five years and that its de-registration was being sought primarily to strengthen the petitioner's claim to title over the land. It held that de-registration proceedings cannot be used as a means of securing title in property disputes, which must be pursued independently in appropriate proceedings.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the Minister's order setting aside the de-registration of the society and dismissed the writ petition.

Case Title: Elite Diagnostic Center Pvt. Ltd. v. Krishna Kunj Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. [Writ Petition No. 7855 of 2026]

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 308

Click Here To Read/Download Order