Remove mutations

What is your query, you are referring mutation issue through arbitration which cannot be possible through arbitration.

@ Double General,

Neither facts not query is clear to form an opinion and obliged. 

It is better to show relevant mutation and arbitration proceeding records to a local prudent for proper analyses of facts and professional advise.

Summary   

❖ On the 4th of March, 2015, Mr. Rahul , in his capacity as the  

Chairman of Multi State Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd., entered a  

transaction with Mr. Sumit the Proprietor and developer, for the acquisition of ten residential flats, specifically numbered G102, G104,  

G105, G204, G405, H201, H202, H203, H204, and H205, each having a built-up area of

45.16 square meters (or 486 square feet). The sale was formalized through an

"Agreement to Sell," which was duly registered with the Sub-Registrar’s Office, Haveli

No. 7, Pune, under Registration No. 1750/2015. The total consideration for the flats

was Rs. 1,05,00,000/- (One crore and five lakh rupees only), which was paid by the

buyer through three cheques.

❖ As mentioned "  Multi State Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd executed a

notary agreement for a loan on February 29, 2015. However, on March 4, 2015, 

Credit Society executed a registered Agreement to Sell for the flats, which did not

include any mention of the loan."

❖ It is explicitly stated on page 8 of the registered "Agreement to Sell" that the property

is free from any encumbrances of any kind. Furthermore, it is confirmed that no loans

have been taken by the Developer and Promoter, Mr. Sumit with

respect to the aforementioned property up to the present date.

❖ The flat was purchased at a rate of Rs. 2,160/- per square foot, under the terms of a

"Buy Back Scheme." As per the scheme, 36 months from the date of the "Agreement

to Sell," the Developer and Promoter, Mr. Sumit  is obligated to repay

an amount calculated at Rs. 4,000/- per square foot. To facilitate this, Mr. sumit

provided the purchaser with ten cheques for the buyback amount.(Section 12(a) on

page 21 and Section 12(g) on page 22 of the agreement).

the event of any dispute between the purchaser and the promoter, a single

arbitrator shall be appointed to resolve the matter. The appointment of the arbitrator

shall be made solely by the Developer and Promoter, Mr. Sumit  as

specified in Section 16 on page 27 of the agreement.

❖ The land in question, is a part and parcel of land measuring 3.5 acres (14,000 square

meters), was designated as N.A. (Non-Agricultural) land by the Government in 2011. A

housing project 

proprietorship of Sumit  , was sanctioned by the Town Planning

Department, Pune. Between 2013 and 2019, approximately 170 to 190 flat allottees

purchased flats based on "Agreements to Sell," which were duly registered with the

Sub-Registrar's office. Additionally, around 50 to 70 flat allottees acquired flats through

Notary and Allotment documents. These flat allottees have made payments with their

hard-earned money and, as such, possess legal rights to the land on which the  housing project is situated.

❖ In all "Agreements to Sell," documents from 2013 to 2019 which were duly registered

with the Sub-Registrar's office, the Proprietor and  

developer , has expressly stated that there are no encumbrances or  

loans of any kind attached to the project."

❖ On 7

th March 2019, Mr. Sumit  the proprietor and developer of  registered the " Housing Project" with MahaRERA. During the

registration process, through the MahaRERA application, Encumbrances Certificate,

and Declaration B form, it was explicitly stated that there were no encumbrances or

loans of any kind associated with the project.

2

October 2018, during a meeting regarding the completion of the housing project,

Sumit verbally stated that a Notary agreement for a loan, backdated to  

February 29, 2015, was created in October 2018 in relation to the  Multi State

Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd.

\\\\\

❖ Multi State Urban Co-Operative Credit Society Ltd had approached Arbitrator  

and passed Interim order on October 16, 2023 and immediately final order on

December 27, 2023 and done mutation of 1 acre of land of Sumit  with

appointment of court receiver.

❖ SC: Interest of homebuyers gets priority over banks' - In a significant order giving

relief to lakhs of home-buyers, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that the interest of

home buyers is more important than the interest of banks in cases where the

developer or builder fails to repay the bank loan.

We had mailed documents regarding all above statements.

Relief -

➢ As an association/ society we want mutation to be cancelled, so we can

search new builder or promoter to complete project and all flat

allottees will get their home.

➢ credit society had ten flats, so we agree of their flat status. 

Do you expect any expert has so much time / energy to go through such a long story to oblige you ?

You may better consult an advocate in the local with all relevant documents and get all your doubts clarified  properly in person.