The assessee, a co-operative housing society, filed a dispute for recovery of arrears of maintenance charges from the legal heir of a deceased member who continued to occupy the flat since 1992 without paying maintenance. The Co-operative Court and the Appellate Court dismissed the society’s claim holding it barred by limitation under section 92(1)(b). On writ, the High Court held that the cause of action for recovery of maintenance was continuous and recurring so long as the opponent continued to occupy the flat and enjoy the amenities. The society restricted its claim to arrears from 2009 and filed the dispute in 2015, which was within the six-year limitation period under section 92(1)(b). The findings of the lower courts were based on a misinterpretation of the provision. Section 92 is a special limitation provision overriding the Limitation Act and intended to protect genuine claims of societies for recovery of dues from members or their successors. The occupant could not evade payment on a technical plea of limitation. Orders of the Co-operative Court and Appellate Court were set aside and the dispute was allowed. The opponent was directed to pay arrears of Rs. 12,15,141 with 9% interest per annum from the respective dates of default till realization. (W.P. No. 11466 of 2023; dt. 16.10.2025)
Giri Chhaya Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Sushila Laliwala (since deceased) through heirs and legal representatives (Bom)(HC) www.itatonline.org .
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960
S. 92: Limitation –Co -Operative Housing Society – Recovery of maintenance charges – Continuous cause of action – Claim not time-barred – Section 92 is a special provision of limitation which overrides the Limitation Act – Orders of the Co-operative Court and Appellate Court were set aside and the dispute was allowed– The opponent was directed to pay arrears of Rs. 12,15,141 with 9% interest per annum from the respective dates of default till realization. [ S.92(1(b ), Limitation Act, 1963, Art 226 ]
Leave a Reply