Bombay High Court Stops Housing Society From Charging Maintenance Based On Flat Size

A local court in Lower Parel has ordered Trader World Premises Cooperative Housing Society to stop charging its members maintenance fees based on the size of their homes, according to a Hindustan Times (HT) report. The court found that the society's practice violated a Bombay High Court order and went against a statutory order issued by the Maharashtra government in 2000.

The Co-operative Court passed this order after hearing a petition from advocate Abha Singh, who argued that housing societies should charge maintenance fees on a per-unit or per-flat basis, not based on the size of the flat. This is in line with the state government's statutory order under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act.

The High Court had earlier confirmed that there is no logical reason for a society to charge maintenance fees according to flat size. "There is absolutely no rational basis for the society to charge for the aforesaid services on the basis of the size of the flats," the court said, as per the HT report.

The case centres on a maintenance charge of Rs 10,77,740 levied by the society on Singh's office premises in 2023. The bills, which were issued on a per-square-foot basis, varied in amount each month. Singh had written to the society in February 2023, asking for the bills to be corrected, stating that she should not be charged based on the size of her property. The society insisted she pay the amount within seven days, leading Singh to take the issue to court.

In her petition, Singh argued that this method of billing violated the Bombay High Court's ruling and was unfair, as she used the same facilities, such as security, common roads, and electricity, as other members. She called for maintenance charges to be applied equally to ensure fairness.

After reviewing the case, the Co-operative Court, led by Judge SK Devkar, found that the 13 maintenance bills presented by Singh contained varying amounts each month, with no clear explanation. The court ruled that levying charges based on flat size was illegal and stated that the society could only issue bills on a per-unit or per-flat basis.