# Delhi Society Flat on GPA: Membership Refused, HC Remands

By Saurabh Garg, founder·8 min read·Published 2026-09-29
**Short answer:** On 22 and 25 September 2026 the Delhi High Court sent back the cases of flat holders in Shiv Vihar Cooperative Group Housing Society who bought on a registered GPA and have lived in their flats since 1989 and 1998. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies had refused them membership because the member they bought from was never approved by the Registrar or sent to DDA, which it said made the original allotment illegal. The court decided nothing on the merits: each buyer must file a revision before the Financial Commissioner within one month, who must decide within three months.

# He Bought a Delhi Society Flat on a GPA in 1998. The Registrar Says the Seller Was Never a Member. The Delhi High Court Has Sent It Back.

**Flat holders in the Shiv Vihar Cooperative Group Housing Society in Delhi bought their flats on a registered GPA and an agreement to sell, one in 1998 and one in 1989, and have lived in them since. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies refused to make them members, because the people they bought from were never approved as members in the first place. On 22 and 25 September 2026 a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court did not decide who is right. It gave each buyer one month to file a revision before the Financial Commissioner, and gave the Financial Commissioner three months to decide.**

## The cases

The lead order is *Lalit Kapoor v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and another*, W.P.(C) 14255/2026, CNR DLHC010463452026. Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt heard it and passed an oral order on 25 September 2026, uploaded on 28 September 2026. It runs to six pages.

The same Bench passed an order in the same terms three days earlier in *Anil Sachdeva v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and another*, W.P.(C) 13976/2026, CNR DLHC010453212026, decided 22 September 2026 and uploaded 24 September 2026. The Registrar's order quoted in it names ten flat holders whose requests for transfer of membership were rejected together.

Neither petitioner is described as an NRI. The cases matter to NRI owners because a registered GPA and an agreement to sell were the common way to buy a Delhi society flat in the 1980s and 1990s, and many of those flats are now owned from abroad.

## The facts in the lead case

- 27 October 1998: Lalit Kapoor took a registered General Power of Attorney and a "sell-purchase agreement" for Flat A-105 from Smt. Raj Rani (paragraph 6). He has been in possession since 1998 (paragraphs 4 and 10).

- 24 May 2023: the Registrar wrote to the society's Administrator about discrepancies found while checking members' documents.

- 20 July 2023: the Administrator replied that members with membership numbers 180 to 215, inducted by the then Management Committee against vacancies from resignation, termination and sale, were never approved by the Registrar, because the procedure under Rule 19(2) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 2007 was not followed. Transfers to legal heirs and nominees had not followed Rules 29 and 30 either.

- The Registrar also found that Raj Rani's name "was neither verified by the office of Registrar Cooperative Societies nor forwarded to DDA" for allotment of a flat.

- 2 August 2024: the Assistant Registrar held that the allotment to Raj Rani was "ab-initio illegal" and that any purchase through a GPA from her was "plainly illegal". Membership was refused.

In the companion case, Anil Sachdeva has held Flat C-207 since 1989 and bought from Sandeep Mehra. The Registrar's order refusing him is dated 8 January 2024.

## Why Section 91 did not help

Section 91 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003, as the Registrar's order quotes it, says a member who sells a flat on a power of attorney, an agreement to sell or a sale deed stops being a member from the date of sale. Its proviso lets a buyer who holds a registered power of attorney, a registered agreement to sell or a registered sale deed apply for membership on a transfer fee of five hundred rupees, plus share money and admission fee under the bye-laws. The committee must grant membership within thirty days, and a refusal can be appealed to the Registrar within thirty days.

The Registrar held that the proviso could not apply, because the flat "was never duly allotted" to the seller. On the Registrar's view, a buyer cannot step into a membership that never existed in law. That was the Registrar's reasoning. The High Court did not endorse it or reject it.

## What the court did

The court framed one question: "whether the Petitioner can be blamed for the fault of the Managing Committee or the Society" (paragraph 13). It accepted that the missing approval of the earlier member "constitutes a deficiency in the Petitioner's case" and that there "can be no doubt" the petitioner has been in possession since 1998 (paragraph 10).

It held that the question has to be decided for each buyer on his own facts, "and not as a part of the bunch of the matters, where different irregularities may have been found" (paragraph 14). Counsel for the Registrar relied on an earlier Delhi High Court decision, *Suresh Kumar Rathee v. Registrar Co-operative Group Housing Societies*, 2023 SCC OnLine Del 2923: where an order is not appealable, a revision lies under Section 116 of the Act (paragraph 15). Counsel also told the court that Raj Rani "was not part of the original draw of lots", which will have to be examined (paragraph 16).

The directions, at paragraph 17:

- The petitioner files a revision under Section 116 before the Financial Commissioner within one month.

- The Financial Commissioner calls for the society's records, hears the society, verifies the petitioner's credentials, and decides on membership "bearing in mind the practical difficulties" the petitioner may face if it is refused.

- The society cooperates, and its Administrator produces every record called for.

- The Financial Commissioner decides within three months of the revision being filed.

The delay in filing the revision is condoned if it is filed within one month (paragraph 19). All rights and contentions are left open (paragraph 18).

In the companion case the petitioner also argued that, since his purchase was in 1989, the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 1972 applies. The court left that to the authorities as a factual issue (paragraph 16 of that order).

## What it means for an NRI owner

The Registrar's order turned on a document the buyers never held: the approval of the person they bought from. Their own GPA was registered and their possession was not in doubt, and the Registrar still refused them, because the chain broke one link earlier.

Neither order says what the Financial Commissioner will decide. What they show is the question the Registrar asks about a society flat bought on a GPA: was the seller's own membership approved by the Registrar, and was the name sent to DDA? Our guide on [whether a GPA can transfer title](/guides/can-general-poa-transfer-property-title-india) covers what a GPA sale does and does not pass, and the Delhi High Court's ruling on [stamp penalty on an agreement to sell that records possession](/guides/nri-gpa-agreement-to-sell-stamp-penalty-delhi-high-court-sep-2026) covers another cost of buying that way. For checks before buying, see [legal due diligence for NRI buyers](/guides/legal-due-diligence-nri-buying-property).

These are orders on one society's records. A refused membership belongs with a lawyer who can read the society's files and the Registrar's order.

## FAQ

**Did the Delhi High Court decide that a GPA buyer of a society flat is entitled to membership?**
No. The orders of 22 and 25 September 2026 leave all contentions open and send each case to the Financial Commissioner.

**Why did the Registrar refuse membership?**
The Registrar found that the members who sold the flats were inducted by the Management Committee without the Registrar's approval under Rule 19(2) of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Rules, 2007, and were never sent to DDA. It held the original allotment illegal, so Section 91 of the 2003 Act did not apply.

**What does Section 91 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 allow?**
As quoted in the Registrar's order, a buyer holding a registered power of attorney, a registered agreement to sell or a registered sale deed can apply for membership on a transfer fee of five hundred rupees plus share money and admission fee, and the committee must decide within thirty days.

**What happens next in these cases?**
Each petitioner has one month from the order to file a revision under Section 116 before the Financial Commissioner, who must decide within three months of filing.

**How long had the petitioners held their flats?**
Lalit Kapoor since 1998 and Anil Sachdeva since 1989, on the court's record.

*66 MG Road newsdesk*

## Sources

- *Lalit Kapoor v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and another*, W.P.(C) 14255/2026 and CM APPL. 66706/2026, CNR DLHC010463452026, Delhi High Court, Prathiba M. Singh and Dinesh Bhatt JJ, oral order, decided 25 September 2026, uploaded 28 September 2026, 6 pages. Full text read on 29 September 2026: [https://indiankanoon.org/doc/59875644/](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/59875644/)

- *Anil Sachdeva v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and another*, W.P.(C) 13976/2026 and CM APPL. 65240/2026, CNR DLHC010453212026, same Bench, decided 22 September 2026, uploaded 24 September 2026. Full text read on 29 September 2026: [https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13151774/](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/13151774/)

- Paragraph 5 of the Lalit Kapoor order says the Registrar's order was passed "almost two and half years ago". That order is dated 2 August 2024, a little over two years before 25 September 2026. The same sentence appears in the Anil Sachdeva order, where the Registrar's order is dated 8 January 2024. We give the dates and not the interval.

- The Lalit Kapoor order names Mr. Dhruv Rohatgi as panel counsel for the respondents in its header and records submissions by Mr. Shashi Pratap Singh for the Registrar at paragraph 15. We report both submissions as the order records them.

About the author: [Saurabh Garg](/about)

Saurabh Garg has run the venture studio C4E for twenty years. He founded 66 MG Road in 2026, reads every proposal request, and replies within one business day.

[saurabhgarg.com](https://saurabhgarg.com) · [@saurabh](https://x.com/saurabh) · [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/in/saurabhgarg)

Information on this page is as on 2026-09-29. Rules, rates, deadlines and government portals change without notice, so verify against the official source before you act. This page is for information only. It is not tax or legal advice, and it is not a substitute for a qualified adviser who knows your position.

## Related guides

- [Can a General Power of Attorney Transfer Property Title in India?](/guides/can-general-poa-transfer-property-title-india)
- [An Unregistered Agreement to Sell Still Gets You to Court. The Stamp Duty Gets There First](/guides/nri-gpa-agreement-to-sell-stamp-penalty-delhi-high-court-sep-2026)
- [Legal Due Diligence Before an NRI Buys Property in India](/guides/legal-due-diligence-nri-buying-property)
- [Society Dues, Property Tax, and Khata: The Remote Owner's Bill Stack](/guides/society-maintenance-bills-khata-remote-owner)
- [NRI Property Management in Delhi](/nri-property-management-delhi)

## Compare and cost

- [The NRI Property Management Companies in India: A Comparison You Can Check](/guides/best-nri-property-management-companies-india)
- [What NRI Property Management Costs in India: The Four Models and What Hides in Each](/guides/nri-property-management-cost-india)
- [NoBroker NRI Services Review: What the Pages Promise and What They Leave Out](/guides/nobroker-nri-services-review)

---

Source: [https://66mgroad.com/guides/nri-delhi-society-flat-gpa-membership-refused-high-court-sep-2026](https://66mgroad.com/guides/nri-delhi-society-flat-gpa-membership-refused-high-court-sep-2026) · 66 MG Road. Full LLM brief: https://66mgroad.com/llms.txt