Clan City Panvel: Bombay HC Lets Allottees Vote on Who Completes the Stalled Project

Clan City, a residential project at Village Rohinjan in Panvel taluka, Raigad district, was formerly known as Hex City. Its flat buyers now say development has stalled and left them "high and dry", in the words the Bombay High Court used in its order of 29 October 2026. Two parties want to finish the project. One is a proposed new developer. The other is a society that says more than half the allottees back it. Rather than choose between them, the court has ordered the home buyers to vote, at a meeting it wants held on or before 15 December 2026.

The order, in Clan City Welfare Association v. State of Maharashtra, Writ Petition No. 17223 of 2024, was passed by Justice Suman Shyam and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad. It appoints a retired Principal District Judge as Court Commissioner to run the meeting, report the outcome by 21 December 2026, and lists the case on 23 December 2026 at 3.00 pm.

The short answer. The Division Bench directed a General Meeting of allottees to decide whether the scheme of Enriching Lives Realty LLP (Respondent No. 22, the proposed new developer), or that of Clan One Society (Respondent No. 24), or neither, is acceptable. Notice must be published in two leading dailies with at least 30 days' clear notice, and the Commissioner may use secret ballots. The trade-off for buyers: they get a direct say on who completes their homes, but the court kept every legal objection open, including "technical hurdles" the original promoter raised against one scheme, so the vote is not the final word.

Why are Clan City buyers in the High Court?

Because the project has stalled and they want someone to complete it. The petitioner is "a registered association of flat purchasers in the residential project 'Clan City' (formerly known as Hex City), originally promoted by Respondent No. 6," the order records. Its prayers, set out in full, ask that steps be taken to complete the project, that a public tender be issued for a new developer, that a co-operative housing society be formed with conveyance of land, that possession be handed over, and that agreements be registered for buyers who have paid money.

What else have the buyers asked the court for?

A great deal, most of which is still pending. The association asked the court to direct the original promoter, or any new builder substituted for it, "to comply with the orders passed by the RERA and Consumer Commission in the proceedings filed by flat purchaser." It asked that the RERA authorities be directed to place on record the existing liabilities on the project and to invite a public tender to complete it and hand over the flats.

It also asked the court to set aside attachment proceedings by the Economic Offences Wings of Mumbai and Navi Mumbai under the MPID Act as far as Clan City property is concerned, and to stay attachment in connection with FIRs registered with Chembur and Taloja police stations and the EOW Navi Mumbai, as listed in the prayers. Separately, it asked that the Enforcement Directorate be directed to sell provisionally attached properties of the promoter side and deposit the proceeds in court for completing the project and meeting other liabilities.

The 29 October order does not decide any of those prayers. It records them, deals only with the competing completion schemes, and says an ad interim order passed earlier will continue until the next date. The order does not describe what that interim order says.

What are the two competing schemes?

During the petition, Enriching Lives Realty LLP, described as "the proposed new developer", submitted a scheme through an interim application. Clan One Society then submitted a separate scheme for completing the project and claimed "the support of more than 50% of the flat allottees". The court framed the question as "which of the two schemes submitted by Respondent Nos. 22 and 24 enjoys the support of the majority of the home-buyers."

The Supreme Court is involved too. According to the order, the Supreme Court by its order dated 22 September 2026 in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 55011/2026 directed the High Court to consider Clan One Society's proposal on a priority basis. On 29 September 2026 the High Court gave the society time to place on record the scheme it had submitted before MahaRERA, and it did so.

How will the allottees' meeting work?

Under the control of a Court Commissioner, with costs shared by the two scheme proponents. The court appointed Mr. Prakash H. Mali, Principal District Judge (retired), "to initiate, conduct, supervise and preside over the meeting of allottees/home buyers and thereafter submit a detailed report of the proceeding of the meeting to this Court, along with the opinion of the home buyers/allottees." The directions were issued by consent of the parties. The meeting is framed as one of allottees and home buyers, not of the members of any one association.

The Commissioner's lump sum fee is Rs. 5 lakh, with another Rs. 5 lakh for secretarial help, costs and office expenses, each shared equally by Respondent Nos. 22 and 24. Those two parties also bear venue, notice and roll preparation costs. Office bearers of both, and of other connected societies, must furnish documents "for the purpose of conducting the meeting in a free, fair and transparent manner." The local Commissioner of Police must provide assistance at the venue.

Does the vote decide the matter?

No. The court said it is "not inclined to go into" the original promoter's objections to Clan One Society's scheme "at this stage", and kept them "open to be considered at a later date, as and when the opinion of the home buyers, becomes available." It also clarified that participating in the meeting "shall be without prejudice to their rights and contentions", and that "all legal issues and contentions involved in this case, are kept open."

What the court did say is that "the paramount consideration of this Court, in this case, would be to protect the interest of the home buyers/allottees," and that the buyers' response "would have a significant bearing in deciding the future course of action." So the vote is a strong input, not a binding result.

What should Clan City allottees do before the meeting?

Get your paperwork and questions ready now, because the notice period is only 30 days and both schemes may change on the day. PropNewz has looked at a dispute over flat purchasers and society membership in the MIG Bandra redevelopment case, and at buyers' rights where agreements were never registered in the Rare Townships Ghatkopar ruling. Use this list before you vote.

1. Collect your allotment letter, any agreement for sale, and every payment receipt and bank statement entry.
2. Check whether your name and unit appear on the allottee list the Commissioner prepares, and raise errors early.
3. Read both schemes in full and note each one's completion timeline, funding source and treatment of amounts already paid.
4. Ask each proponent how your flat number, area and parking will be honoured.
5. Ask how each scheme deals with existing RERA and consumer commission orders in favour of buyers.
6. Note any improved offer made at the meeting in writing, since the court allowed improvements on the day.
7. Take independent legal advice before voting, because legal objections remain open for the court.

What happens after 21 December 2026?

The Commissioner files a signed report with the buyers' opinion. The writ petition and connected applications come up on 23 December 2026 at 3.00 pm as a fixed item. Until then, the ad interim order passed earlier continues. The court will then consider "the viability and acceptability of the competing proposals", along with the objections it has kept open. PropNewz will report the outcome of the meeting and the court's next order.

Frequently asked questions

What did the Bombay High Court order in the Clan City case on 29 October 2026?

The Division Bench directed a General Meeting of Clan City allottees, run by retired Principal District Judge Prakash H. Mali as Court Commissioner, to decide whether the scheme of Enriching Lives Realty LLP, the scheme of Clan One Society, or neither is acceptable. The meeting is preferably to be held by 15 December 2026.

Will the allottees' vote decide who completes Clan City?

Not by itself. The court said the buyers' opinion would have a significant bearing on its decision, but kept all legal issues and objections open, including the original promoter's objections to Clan One Society's scheme. Participation is without prejudice to the parties' rights. The court will consider the report on 23 December 2026.

How will Clan City allottees be told about the meeting?

The order requires at least 30 days' clear notice published in two leading daily newspapers, stating the date, time, venue and agenda. The Commissioner will prepare an authentic list of allottees with the two scheme proponents, and only allottees and authorised representatives of the parties may enter the meeting hall.

Who pays for the Court Commissioner and the meeting?

Enriching Lives Realty LLP and Clan One Society share the costs equally. These include the Commissioner's lump sum fee of Rs. 5 lakh, another Rs. 5 lakh for secretarial help and office expenses, and venue, notice and roll preparation costs, under the court's order.

This article summarises a court order for general information and is not legal or investment advice. No finding has been made on the allegations or objections in the case.

Last updated 2026-11-08. PropNewz Team.