Bombay High Court Rules Larger Flats Must Pay Higher Maintenance Fees

The Bombay High Court has clarified that flat owners with larger apartments in Maharashtra’s condominiums must pay higher maintenance charges, in line with the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970. This ruling brings clarity to ongoing disputes over maintenance fees.

Bombay High CourtMaharashtra Apartment Ownership ActMaintenance FeesTreasure ParkProportional ChargesReal Estate MaharashtraAug 17, 2025

Bombay High Court Rules Larger Flats Must Pay Higher Maintenance Fees
Real Estate Maharashtra:The Bombay High Court has ruled that flat owners with larger apartments in Maharashtra’s apartment condominiums must pay higher maintenance charges, in line with the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970. The judgment clarifies the distinction between the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1971 and the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970, which determine how maintenance is calculated. Under the 1971 Act, common in co-operative housing societies, maintenance is usually charged equally per flat. However, under the 1970 Act, applicable to apartment-condominiums, charges must be proportional to the carpet area of each unit, as owners hold an undivided share in the common property.

The case arose from a dispute in Treasure Park, a Pune residential complex with 356 flats in 11 buildings. In 2022, its managing body resolved to collect equal maintenance from all owners, regardless of flat size. Owners of smaller flats challenged this, arguing it violated the law, which mandates that maintenance costs be shared according to each owner’s share in the common areas—linked directly to the apartment size. The deputy registrar of co-operative societies agreed with them, ordering proportional fees.

Larger flat owners contested the order before the Co-operative Court in Pune, which dismissed their plea in May 2022. They then approached the Bombay High Court, claiming maintenance funds were for equally used common areas and that assuming larger flats house more residents—and therefore must pay more—was unfair.

Justice Milind Jadhav rejected this argument, citing both the Act and the condominium’s declaration, which require proportionate charges. He emphasised that larger units have a greater undivided interest in the property’s land and amenities, justifying higher contributions.

The ruling reinforces that under the 1970 Act, apartment owners are co-owners of the land and common areas, unlike under the 1971 Act where ownership is limited to individual units with access to shared facilities. The judgment ensures that maintenance costs reflect property size and ownership share, bringing clarity to disputes over charges in Maharashtra’s apartment complexes.

In summary, the Bombay High Court ruled that larger apartment owners in Maharashtra condominiums must pay higher maintenance under the 1970 Act, which bases charges on carpet area. In a Pune dispute, smaller flat owners won against equal fees, with the court affirming proportional charges to reflect ownership share in common property.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970?

The Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970, governs the ownership and management of apartment condominiums in Maharashtra. It mandates that maintenance charges be proportional to the carpet area of each unit, reflecting each owner’s share in the common property.

Why did the Bombay High Court rule in favor of proportional maintenance charges?

The Bombay High Court ruled in favor of proportional maintenance charges because the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970, requires maintenance fees to be based on the carpet area of each unit. Larger units have a greater undivided interest in the property’s land and amenities, justifying higher contributions.

What was the dispute in Treasure Park about?

The dispute in Treasure Park, a Pune residential complex, was about whether maintenance fees should be charged equally for all flats or proportionally based on the carpet area. Smaller flat owners argued for proportional charges, which the court ultimately upheld.

What is the main difference between the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1971, and the Maharashtra Apartment Ownership Act, 1970?

The main difference is that under the 1971 Act, maintenance is usually charged equally per flat, while under the 1970 Act, charges are proportional to the carpet area of each unit. The 1970 Act treats apartment owners as co-owners of the land and common areas.

How does this ruling affect apartment owners in Maharashtra?

This ruling ensures that maintenance costs in Maharashtra’s apartment complexes reflect property size and ownership share. Larger apartment owners must pay higher maintenance fees, bringing clarity to disputes over charges and ensuring fair distribution of costs.

Related News Articles

India's Housing Market Sees Unprecedented Growth in 2024
real estate news

India's Housing Market Sees Unprecedented Growth in 2024

Residential property sales in India reach an 11-year high in H1 2024, with premium housing sales rising to 34% market share.

July 5, 2024
Read Article
Mastermind of 60+ Cyber Frauds Arrested at Surat Airport by Navi Mumbai Cyber Police
Real Estate Mumbai

Mastermind of 60+ Cyber Frauds Arrested at Surat Airport by Navi Mumbai Cyber Police

A 34-year-old accused, wanted by multiple states, was arrested at Surat Airport for masterminding over 60 cyber frauds from Dubai.

July 13, 2024
Read Article
ADB to Offer Rs 1527 Crore for Phase II of Nagpur Metro Project
Real Estate Maharashtra

ADB to Offer Rs 1527 Crore for Phase II of Nagpur Metro Project

The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has pledged Rs 1527 crore to support the Phase II expansion of the Nagpur Metro project, aiming to enhance urban mobility and infrastructure in the city.

December 18, 2024
Read Article
AT&T Concludes $850 Million Real Estate Deal with Reign Capital
Real Estate

AT&T Concludes $850 Million Real Estate Deal with Reign Capital

AT&T (NYSE:T) has successfully completed a significant real estate transaction, transferring 74 of its underutilized properties to Reign Capital, a private development firm.

January 24, 2025
Read Article
SL Green Realty's SWOT Analysis: NYC Office Giant's Stock Poised for Growth
real estate news

SL Green Realty's SWOT Analysis: NYC Office Giant's Stock Poised for Growth

SL Green Realty, a major player in the New York City office real estate market, faces both challenges and opportunities. This SWOT analysis delves into the company's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, providing insights into its potential

January 25, 2025
Read Article
Fathom Holdings Doubles Down on Bitcoin: Allocates 50% of Cash Reserves and Embraces BTC Payments
Real Estate

Fathom Holdings Doubles Down on Bitcoin: Allocates 50% of Cash Reserves and Embraces BTC Payments

Fathom Holdings, a leading real estate services company, is making a significant move into the world of cryptocurrencies by allocating half of its cash reserves to Bitcoin and planning to accept Bitcoin payments. This bold decision underscores the company

January 26, 2025
Read Article