Can housing societies charge higher maintenance fee for bigger flats? Here’s what a recent court ruling said
Homeowners in Mumbai may have a reason to challenge maintenance bills that vary based on the size or use of their property. The Maharashtra co-operative court held in a recent ruling that housing societies cannot arbitrarily charge higher maintenance fees from owners of larger flats or commercial units unless there is a solid legal reason for doing so.
The judgement came after a case was filed by unhappy residents of a housing society in Worli, Mumbai, who argued that the society should split the common maintenance charges equally among all members. According to the complaint, the housing society has been calculating these charges based on the size of each flat or shop, with commercial units facing higher fees,
The residents also claimed that the shops located within the society’s premises were being charged twice the rate of residential flats. The society was also allegedly charging for water connections even when some residents didn’t have one, which led the aggrieved residents to approach the court, according to a news report by The Economic Times.
Complaints against the society vs its defence
Apart from objecting to the maintenance and water charges, the unhappy residents also raised concerns about the society’s condition, alleging that it was poorly managed. They also questioned the process followed for awarding major repair contracts, seeking greater scrutiny of such decisions.
The housing society, however, contested the residents’ claim. It argued that some of the residents who approached the court had themselves defaulted on their maintenance payments. While the society acknowledged that the complainants were its members and that it was a registered cooperative housing society, it denied that the billing was illegal or arbitrary.
Responding to the concerns regarding maintenance charges levied on shops, the society argued that commercial units are governed by separate rules for allotment, management and maintenance. According to the society, these rules were accepted and signed by the concerned allottees, creating a contractual arrangement between the society and these allottees.
The society also denied the allegations relating to water charges and mismanagement. On major repair works, it maintained that the process was transparent, with quotations being invited before contracts were awarded.
Court rules in residents’ favour; here’s why
On August 10, 2026 the court ruled in favour of the aggrieved residents on maintenance charges issue, holding that the society could not levy different charges without a valid legal basis. However, it rejected the residents’ other allegations and ruled in favour of the housing society on those issues.
Citing previous cases and their judgements, the Maharashtra co-operative court said that in cases where the services and amenities maintained by the society are common and enjoyed by all the members alike, a member holding a larger flat does not, merely for that reason, receive proportionately greater services to justify a higher levy of common maintenance charges.
Another reason that ruling went favour of the residents was that the court noted the housing society had not entered the witness box to explain the basis upon which the different maintenance charges were calculated.
Thus the court held that the housing society’s claim that separate rules governed the allotment, management and maintenance of shops was not substantiated by examining any witness or proving the factual foundation upon which such differential common maintenance is claimed.
Regarding other allegations and grievances raised by the residents, the court said that the claim regarding water charges lacked evidence and that the information provided by them was not enough to prove the allegation. As a result, the affected residents partly won the case on the limited issue of higher maintenance fee in the Maharashtra co-operative court.
