If appeal is dismissed by HC the remedy will be SLP in Supreme Court 

If the High Court set aside the arbitral award and passed an order to vacate, your next step depends on who passed that order.

If it was a Single Judge, you may be able to file an intra-court appeal (LPA), but only if it's allowed in arbitration matters by your High Court rules.

If it was a Division Bench, then your only option is to file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court.

If you believe there was fraud or your independent rights were ignored, you may explore a fresh civil suit, but that depends on the facts.

Act quickly, because SLP must be filed within 90 days from the date of judgment. Also, seek interim stay if eviction is imminent.

Given that you succeeded in the arbitration but lost in the builder’s appeal before the High Court, your immediate remedy is to file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. The SLP must be filed within 90 days from the date of the High Court order. If the High Court’s judgment suffers from perversity, misapplication of law, or procedural irregularity, the Supreme Court may entertain the SLP.

Additionally, if the discriminatory terms of the development agreement or the inequitable treatment of your commercial unit were not fully adjudicated in arbitration, you may initiate independent civil proceedings seeking declaration, injunction, or damages. A review petition in the High Court is another option but is rarely successful unless there’s an error apparent on the face of the record. Parallel consumer or constitutional remedies are also some options but these are generally limited in such contractual disputes.

Pls connect for further help 😊

You have to file appeal in SC against HC order 

It is not cleqr what sort of order is passed under which kind of proceeding.

In any case if no further appeal lies in High Court then you can always go to Supreme Court under SLP. 

Dear Sir/Madam,

You are suggested to approach higher court clearling specifying the infirmity of the order passed by the High Court. 

Dear Client,

Thank you for sharing the details of your matter. Based on the information provided, please find below a detailed legal opinion regarding your rights and remedies:

Case Summary:

You are the sole commercial unit owner in the society, and the builder has executed a development agreement with the society that unfairly offers you less than half the benefits granted to residential members. Upon your objection, the builder initiated arbitration proceedings in the High Court. Initially, the court granted a favorable order in your favour, but on appeal, the builder secured a judgment directing you to vacate.

Available Legal Options:

✅ 1. Intra-Court Appeal (Within High Court):

If the recent unfavorable order was passed by a Single Judge Bench, you may still have the remedy to file an Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) before a Division Bench of the same High Court, provided such appeal is maintainable under the relevant court rules and has not already been filed.

✅ 2. Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court:

If the appeal has already been heard and disposed of by a Division Bench or if the order is considered final in nature, you have the right to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India by filing a Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.

Grounds for SLP may include:

• Unequal treatment in violation of Article 14 (Right to Equality),

• Imposition of an agreement without your consent,

• Arbitrary or biased vacate orders,

• Failure to properly hear or consider your objections.

✅ 3. Separate Civil Proceedings:

You can also initiate independent civil proceedings in a Civil or Commercial Court seeking:

• Declaration that the development agreement is arbitrary, discriminatory, or unenforceable against you,

• Injunction to prevent eviction or execution of such agreement,

• Damages/compensation for any loss or harassment caused due to the actions of the builder or society.

✅ Additional Legal Observations:

• If the builder executed the development agreement without proper approval or consent from all affected stakeholders (like you), the agreement may be legally challengeable.

• Discriminatory terms imposed on commercial units vis-à-vis residential units can be contested under the principles of natural justice and equality before the law.

• If your property title, usage rights, and ownership documents support your claims, courts may provide equitable relief.

you will have to approach the Supreme Court

would like to see the orders

even though you have been asked to vacate you can agitate your claim for higher redevelopment benefits before the Arbitrator who will be appointed by the High Court

the Supreme Court in most likelihood will not interfere with the appellate order of the High Court since only because of one member who refuses to vacate the entire project cannot be brought to a standstill

whatever grievances you have regarding non providing of the fungible FSI and offering lesser rent than market rate, all of that you can agitate before the Arbitrator, so you are not remediless

and you cannot compare residential with commercial. That would be like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole

the builder would not give bank guarantee to individual members. If the society has let go the bank guarantee then one member of that society cannot say that because the bank guarantee is not provided there is no security

you need to understand that once you become a member of the society you lose your individuality and you can only speak through the society. In this case the society has not insisted for a BG, so your sole demand for it would be unreasonable

as regards the extra 35% towards fungible FSI, you have to prove that even though the builder has been granted 35% extra for the commercial unit, he is only offering 15% and balance 20% he seems to be diverting for other units or perhaps for his free sale component 

This is a complex legal situation, and I strongly recommend you consult with a lawyer specializing in real estate and arbitration law in India immediately. They will be able to review all the documents, including the development agreement, the initial arbitration award, and the High Court's appeal order, to provide you with specific and accurate legal advice. I can give you a general overview of the legal avenues available in India,

1. Appeal against the High Court's Favorable Order (to the Builder):

• Appeal in the Supreme Court of India:

  • Special Leave Petition (SLP) under Article 136 of the Constitution: This is the most common way to appeal to the Supreme Court. It grants the Supreme Court discretionary power to hear appeals from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order passed by any court or tribunal in India.

    • Grounds for SLP: You would need to demonstrate that the High Court's order involves a substantial question of law, a constitutional violation, or a gross miscarriage of justice.

    • Time Limit: Generally, an SLP must be filed within 90 days from the date of the High Court's decision.

  • Appeal under Articles 132, 133, or 134 (if applicable): These articles deal with appeals involving substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution (Article 132), or in civil matters where the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance that needs to be decided by the Supreme Court (Article 133). In criminal matters, Article 134 allows appeals in specific scenarios (e.g., if the High Court reversed an acquittal and sentenced to death/life imprisonment). Given your case is commercial/civil, Article 133 or an SLP would be more likely.

2. Separate Proceedings / Review:

• Review Petition in the High Court: While an appeal against an appeal order isn't typical within the High Court itself (as you've already had one appeal), you might be able to file a review petition in the High Court. This is usually possible on very limited grounds, such as:

  • Discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within your knowledge or could not be produced by you at the time when the decree was passed or order made.

  • Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.

  • Any other sufficient reason.

  • The chances of success for a review petition are generally low, as it's not a re-hearing of the appeal on its merits.

Key Considerations for your situation:

• Arbitration Act: Since the matter went to arbitration, the appeal process will be governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The scope of appeals from arbitration awards is often limited to specific grounds, such as fraud, bias, or violation of public policy. Your lawyer will need to carefully examine if the High Court's decision aligns with the provisions of the Arbitration Act for appeals against arbitral awards.

• "Half the benefits given to residential members": This is a crucial point. Your lawyer will assess whether the differential treatment of your commercial unit violates any contractual terms, statutory provisions, or principles of fairness and equality. This could be a strong point to argue in a higher appeal.

• Substantial Question of Law: To appeal to the Supreme Court, your case must involve a "substantial question of law" that needs to be decided by the apex court. Your lawyer will help identify and frame such questions based on the High Court's judgment.

• Timeline: Strict timelines apply for filing appeals. Do not delay in seeking legal counsel.

It is clear that the builder managed to execute a development agreement with the society that disproportionately affects your rights as the sole commercial unit holder, granting significantly more benefits to residential members. You opposed the agreement, and when the matter reached the High Court under arbitration proceedings, the initial order was in your favour. However, the builder filed an appeal, and the appellate court passed a favourable order for the builder, directing you to vacate.

You have legal remedies available at this stage. You can challenge the appellate order by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India under Article 136 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court may entertain the petition if it finds that the order passed by the High Court is arbitrary, perverse, or suffers from a serious legal infirmity.

Alternatively, depending on the precise content and procedural posture of the High Court order, it may be possible to seek a review or clarification from the same High Court, particularly if material facts were overlooked or there was a procedural lapse. If the arbitration proceedings are still pending or incomplete, you may also consider initiating independent civil proceedings challenging the discriminatory nature of the development agreement, particularly on grounds of inequality, lack of proper representation, and violation of fundamental rights under Article 14 of the Constitution.

Prompt action is essential, especially if timelines for appeal or SLP filing are running. We recommend a detailed review of the High Court judgment and relevant arbitration records.

If you require further legal assistance in filing the SLP or exploring other remedies, you may contact us directly for representation and support in the matter.

File appeal under Section 37 (c) of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to High Court against the  order passed in appeal under Section 34.

The next step is usually to consider the implications of the award and whether to comply with it. If the losing party is not willing to comply, they may explore further legal options such as a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court, though this is not guaranteed to be accepted. 

You may thoroughly review review the High Court's judgment to understand the reasons for dismissing the appeal and the implications of the arbitral award. 

Assess the financial and practical implications of complying with the award.

If compliance is feasible, take steps to fulfill the obligations outlined in the award. 

A losing party in the High Court can file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) with the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution. 

The Supreme Court has discretionary power to grant leave to appeal, and it usually does so only in cases with significant legal or constitutional issues or if there's a miscarriage of justice. 

I would like to know which law or rule says that the threshold for redevelopment is 75%?

I am not able to understand how you are defrauded. 

You can pursue filing a civil suit to agitate for your grievances 

In my initial reply to your query , I had said that you can raise all your contentions before the arbitrator 

However that cannot be done since the development agreement having an arbitration clause is between the developer and society in which individual members are not party 

Don't make youtube videos and all. It may backfire 

review petition is waste of time and money . no  new facts have been discovered calling for review 

dont make any you tube videos 

3) A 75% threshold for signing a development agreement typically means that if the agreement isn't signed by at least 75% of the relevant parties, it might not be legally valid or enforceable. Failure to meet this threshold could indeed nullify the agreement. 

1. File SLP in Supreme Court

• Against the High Court appellate order.

• Must be filed within 90 days.

• Only allowed if there's a substantial legal error or injustice.

2. Review Petition in High Court

• Can be filed within 30 days.

• Only for clear errors or new facts; success is rare.

3. Challenge Development Agreement

• If you hold 25%+ area, and 75% consent wasn’t obtained, file a complaint under MOFA/RERA.

4. Criminal/Civil Case

• Only if there’s fresh cause or proof of fraud, not the same issue already decided.

5. Public Awareness

• You can speak out (e.g., YouTube), but avoid defamation — stick to facts.

Regarding the Nullification of the Development Agreement (75% Threshold):

• Threshold for Signing: In India, for the redevelopment of a cooperative housing society, the consent of a significant majority of members is typically required. While 75% is a common threshold often stipulated in bye-laws or government guidelines (e.g., for redevelopment in Maharashtra, a 51% consent was deemed sufficient in some cases, while often it is 70% or 75% as per society by-laws and relevant circulars/rules), the exact percentage can vary depending on the state's cooperative society laws and the specific bye-laws of your society.

• Holding over 25% area: If you collectively (as a group of members) hold over 25% of the area in the society, it means that the developer and society would have needed the consent of at least 75% of the remaining members' area or 75% of the total members to proceed with the agreement. If the agreement was signed without the requisite 75% consent (either by number of members or by area, as specified in your society's bye-laws and relevant laws), it could potentially be challenged as void or voidable.

• Legal Challenge: If the development agreement was signed without fulfilling the required threshold of consent, you may have strong grounds to challenge its validity. This would typically involve filing a civil suit seeking a declaration that the agreement is null and void and/or an injunction to stop the development.

Regarding Civil and Criminal Proceedings:

• Clear Premeditated Informed Choice to Benefit at Your Expense: If you can demonstrate that the developer and society management acted with malicious intent, knowingly circumventing legal requirements or defrauding members for personal gain, you might have grounds for both civil and criminal proceedings.

  • Civil Proceedings: You can file a civil suit for:

    • Declaration: To declare the development agreement null and void.

    • Injunction: To stop the ongoing development.

    • Damages: To seek compensation for any losses incurred due to their actions.

    • Specific Performance (in certain cases): Though less likely if you want to nullify the agreement, but for other breaches.

  • Criminal Proceedings: If there's evidence of criminal offenses like cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery, or conspiracy (Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, respectively), you could potentially initiate criminal proceedings by filing a police complaint (FIR) or a private complaint before a Magistrate. Proving "premeditated informed choice" and "intent to defraud" is crucial in criminal cases, and the burden of proof is high.

• Evidence is Key: For both civil and criminal cases, you will need substantial evidence to support your claims of fraud and illegal actions. This could include:

  • Society meeting minutes.

  • Copies of the development agreement.

  • Communication between members, society, and developer.

  • Financial records.

  • Expert opinions (e.g., on property valuation if relevant).

Regarding Review Petition and YouTube Videos:

• Review Petition against SLP not allowed: A Review Petition is filed in the Supreme Court to review its own judgment or order. If an SLP (Special Leave Petition) is not allowed (meaning the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal), there is generally no scope for a review petition against that refusal itself. An SLP is a discretionary power of the Supreme Court under Article 136 of the Constitution, and its dismissal generally means the Court found no substantial question of law or grave injustice warranting its intervention.

• Making YouTube Videos Highlighting Use of Courts to Defraud:

  • Freedom of Speech vs. Defamation: While you have the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, this right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions, including laws related to defamation.

  • Defamation Risk: If you make YouTube videos accusing the developer and society of defrauding without strong, legally admissible evidence and proper legal substantiation, you run a significant risk of facing a defamation suit (both civil and criminal) from the developer or society.

  • Truth as a Defense: While truth can be a defense to defamation, it must be proven in court. Merely believing something is true is not enough; you must have concrete evidence to back up your claims.

  • Reputational Harm: Accusing parties of fraud publicly can cause them significant reputational and financial harm, which they may seek to recover through defamation proceedings.

  • Recommendation: It is generally advisable to pursue legal remedies through the courts first and allow the legal process to unfold. Publicly disseminating information, especially accusations of fraud, before a judicial determination can be risky. If you do choose to make such videos, ensure they are factual, well-researched, and carefully worded, focusing on the facts of the case rather than unsubstantiated accusations. It's best to discuss this strategy with your lawyer.

You hold over 25% of the total area in the society, which gives you a significant interest in any redevelopment activity undertaken by the society and the developer. As per prevailing redevelopment norms, including those under various Apartment Ownership Acts or municipal development control regulations, a minimum threshold of 75% consent of existing owners is mandatory for the validity of any redevelopment or development agreement. If such consent has not been validly obtained or has been misrepresented by including forged, coerced, or uninformed signatures, then the entire Development Agreement can be challenged as null and void.

You have legal grounds to initiate both civil and criminal action. On the civil side, you can institute a suit for declaration and injunction before the competent civil court, seeking to restrain the developer and society from acting upon the agreement until the matter is resolved. You can also challenge the legality of the agreement and claim damages for loss caused by the unauthorized actions of the developer and the society.

On the criminal side, if there is clear material indicating fraud, forgery, cheating, or conspiracy to cause wrongful loss to you and others, you may lodge a complaint before the police or file a private criminal complaint before the Magistrate. You can invoke provisions related to cheating (Section 420 IPC), criminal breach of trust (Section 406 IPC), forgery (Sections 465, 467, 468 IPC), use of forged documents (Section 471 IPC), and criminal conspiracy (Section 120B IPC).

In the event that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) is dismissed without granting leave to appeal, and no detailed reasoning is provided, you may explore the remedy of a review petition before the High Court or original forum. A curative petition before the Supreme Court remains an extraordinary remedy and is rarely entertained unless there has been a serious miscarriage of justice.

You are within your rights to speak publicly on the matter, including through social media or YouTube, provided that you do not level unproven or defamatory allegations against identifiable individuals or judicial institutions. Any public statement should remain factual, based on court records or documents in your possession, and should avoid contemptuous or scandalous remarks.

A 75% consent of the society members is generally the threshold for redevelopment of a housing society in many jurisdictions. 

This means that at least 75% of the society's members must agree to the redevelopment proposal before it can move forward. 

Redevelopment projects typically require a significant majority of members to agree.

The exact rules and procedures for redevelopment, including the consent threshold, can vary slightly by state and local regulations.

In Maharashtra, specific guidelines under Section 79A of the relevant law guide the redevelopment process.

Your proposal for making youtube videos on this may not be advisable because there are chances for backfire with defamation cases that can be filed against you.

No criminal case against the developer may  also not be maintainable in the given situation.

You can look for civil case to vent out your grievances while seeking injunction restraining the developer from proceeding with the redevelopment for the reasons you rely upon. 

If you hold more than 25% area in the society, and the developer went ahead without your consent, the redevelopment agreement can be challenged—because legally, 75% consent is mandatory. You absolutely have the right to file both civil and criminal cases if there’s evidence of fraud or collusion between the society and the builder.

If your SLP isn’t entertained, you can explore a review petition, but only if there’s a clear legal error. And yes, you’re free to raise your voice on platforms like YouTube—as long as you stick to facts and don’t defame anyone, it's a powerful way to create awareness and public pressure.

You can try review but chances are less in review. After review also you can file SLP. You can nair videos but can only utter truth and not commit contempt of court 

Yes, you may have valid legal grounds to challenge the redevelopment agreement, both civilly and criminally, if:

• You hold more than 25% of the total area,

• Your consent was not obtained,

• And there is evidence of premeditated intent to defraud or exclude.

If the Special Leave Petition (SLP) is not entertained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, you may explore options like a review/recall petition, writ petition, or public awareness methods like YouTube—within legal bounds.   

Legal Background  Redevelopment Agreements

1. Threshold under Redevelopment Law:

   • In Maharashtra, as per Government GR dated 3 Jan 2009, and amended norms including under the Model Bye-Laws, redevelopment requires:

      Approval of at least 75% of the total members of the co-operative housing society (not area-wise).

   • However, courts have held that in case of serious objections by substantial members or stakeholders, even 75% approval does not automatically validate the agreement if there's fraud, coercion, misrepresentation, or exclusion of interested parties.

2. Holding Over 25% Area:

   • If you hold 25% or more of the area, especially if it involves multiple flats or commercial premises, you may be considered a major stakeholder.

   • Exclusion of such a stakeholder from consent, planning, or benefit-sharing can be legally challenged on grounds of:

     • Breach of natural justice

     • Misuse of majority

     • • File a complaint under MCS Act, 1960 before:

         • Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies

         • Cooperative Court

       • Grounds: Fraudulent redevelopment, lack of transparency, exclusion from General Body meetings

         Biased or fraudulent intent   

         
         Legal Remedies You Can Pursue

         1.  Civil Suit (Injunction + Declaration)

         • You can file a civil suit for:

           • Declaration that the development agreement is void or illegal

           • Injunction restraining further acts of redevelopment

         • Especially valid if:

           • You were never given notice

           • The builder is acting in collusion with the managing committee

         2.  Complaint to Registrar / Cooperative Court                                           3.  Criminal Complaint (Cheating & Criminal Conspiracy)

         
         

• File FIR or criminal complaint for:

  • Cheating (Section 420 IPC)

  • Criminal conspiracy (Section 120B IPC)

  • Breach of trust (Section 406 IPC)

• If the developer and office bearers knowingly misled, bypassed, or forged consent processes

4.  Writ Petition (Article 226)

• If your legal remedies are not heard fairly or there's abuse of power, file a writ petition in High Court

• Can challenge administrative inaction or fraud

5.  Review or Recall Petition

• If your SLP is dismissed, and you have new facts or errors on record, file:

  • Review Petition under Order XLVII CPC

  • Recall application if judgment was passed ex parte or due to suppression of facts 

    
    Immediate Action Plan

    1. Collect all documents, notices, and minutes of meetings

    2. Serve a legal notice to the society and developer

    3. File complaint with Registrar and Co-op Court

    4. File civil suit + criminal complaint if evidence supports foul play

    5. Use social media cautiously to highlight broader issues of misuse of majority and redevelopment fraud  .                                                          You may have a strong case to challenge the redevelopment if you were deliberately excluded despite holding a significant share. Legal remedy is available via civil, criminal, and regulatory routes. If SLP fails, other remedies including review or High Court writ petition remain open.

    
    

you should file case to claim 35 per cent free fungible benfits as given to other members 

Legal Opinion: Discriminatory Allocation of Fungible FSI – Civil & Criminal Implications

Based on your statement, the developer and society have entered into an agreement that all members shall receive 35% extra area through fungible FSI. However, you are being allotted only 20% extra without legal justification, despite being a valid and equal member (commercial unit holder) of the society. You allege this was done to unjustly enrich:

• Other members (with larger area benefits), and

• The developer (who uses the saved FSI for commercial exploitation: tower parking and saleable space on 1st floor).

You also mention documented communication that shows all stakeholders were aware of the discriminatory allocation, indicating wilful collusion.

 Key Legal Issues Identified:

1. Arbitrary & Unequal Treatment:

   • Allocation of fungible FSI must be proportionate unless restricted by law or regulation.

   • If residential and commercial units are treated unequally without a lawful basis, it may amount to discrimination and breach of equality under cooperative law and RERA norms.

2. Misappropriation of Common Benefits:

   • Fungible FSI is a common asset accruing to all plot owners or society members.

   • Diverting it selectively benefits the developer and certain members, amounting to misappropriation or breach of trust.

3. Developer–Society Collusion:

   • If records show that both developer and society committee members deliberately reduced your share and reallocated it to others while being fully aware of the illegality, it may constitute:

     • Conspiracy (Section 120B IPC)

     • Criminal breach of trust (Section 409 IPC)

     • Cheating (Section 420 IPC)

4. Violation of Contractual or Statutory Rights:

   • If your development agreement or society bye-laws provide equal FSI rights, the action is unlawful and may give rise to:

     • Civil action for specific performance/declaration / compensation

     • Criminal complaints for conspiracy and cheating

Advice on Proving Criminality:

The following evidence will strengthen your case to prove conspiracy and fraud:

Already Mentioned:

• Communication records showing awareness of discrimination by developer and society

• Development agreement clauses granting 35% fungible FSI uniformly

• Comparison charts showing other members receiving more benefits

Recommended to Collect:

• Society meeting minutes or resolutions where FSI distribution was discussed or manipulated

• Consent letters or emails where some members oppose or raise no objection despite knowing disparity

• Floor plans, architectural approvals, and sale brochures showing additional areas/floor benefits diverted to others

• Proof of gain – e.g., parking or commercial area created from FSI that rightfully belonged to you

• Expert valuation comparing commercial vs residential benefits from diverted FSI

 Legal Remedies:

1. Civil Suit:

   • File in Cooperative Court or Civil Court for declaration, injunction, and compensation.

   • Seek cancellation of development agreement or direction to enforce 35% equally.

2. RERA Complaint:

   • File against developer for unfair practice and discriminatory benefit allocation.

   • RERA can order rectification and compensation.

3. Criminal Complaint:

   • If evidence shows wilful and dishonest deprivation of your rightful share for wrongful gain to others, file a police complaint or private criminal complaint for:

     • Cheating (Section 420 IPC)

     • Criminal breach of trust (Section 409 IPC)

     • Forgery (if any false representations exist)

     • Conspiracy (Section 120B IPC)

Yes, based on your detailed facts and existing records, you do have the foundational material to allege conspiracy and fraud. However, to succeed criminally, you must clearly establish intention, collusion, and wrongful gain with documentary proof.

We recommend filing:

• A civil suit and/or RERA complaint immediately to secure your rights.

• A criminal complaint once you consolidate documentary evidence of collusion and discrimination.

This is a  Complicated situation, and it certainly sounds like you have strong grounds to argue both civil fraud and criminal conspiracy.

Understanding Criminal Conspiracy and Fraud in India

Criminal Conspiracy (Indian Penal Code, Sections 120A & 120B):

Section 120A defines criminal conspiracy:

• When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done:

  • An illegal act, OR

  • An act which is not illegal by illegal means.

Section 120B deals with punishment.

Key elements for criminal conspiracy:

1. Agreement between two or more persons: This is the cornerstone. There must be a "meeting of minds" (consensus ad idem) to achieve an unlawful object or a lawful object by unlawful means. The agreement doesn't have to be formal or written; it can be inferred from actions and circumstances.

2. To do an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means: In your case, denying you your rightful share of the fungible FSI and gaining benefits for themselves and others through deceit would constitute an "illegal act" (fraud).

3. Intention: The conspirators must have a common intention to commit the illegal act.

4. Overt Act (sometimes required): While the agreement itself is the essence of conspiracy, for certain conspiracies (those not to commit an offense punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or 2 years or more), some act besidesthe agreement needs to be done in pursuance of the agreement. However, if the conspiracy is to commit a serious offense (which fraud often is), the agreement itself can be sufficient.

Fraud (Indian Contract Act, Section 17, and also relevant for criminal aspects like cheating under IPC):

Section 17 of the Indian Contract Act defines "fraud" broadly and includes:

• Suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true.

• Active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact.

• A promise made without any intention of performing it.

• Any other act fitted to deceive.

• Any such act or omission as the law specially declares to be fraudulent.

Key elements for fraud:

1. False representation/concealment: There must be a false statement of fact or active concealment of a material fact. In your case, the agreement to develop "full 35% extra for all members" while only giving you 20% would be a false representation, and the concealment of this disparity is active concealment.

2. Knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard: The party making the representation must know it's false or be recklessly indifferent to its truth.

3. Intention to deceive: The purpose must be to deceive the other party.

4. Inducement: The deception must induce the other party to act (or refrain from acting) in a way they wouldn't have otherwise. You were induced to agree based on a false premise.

5. Damage/Loss: The deceived party suffers a loss or is put at risk of loss. You are suffering a direct financial loss in terms of valuable area.

Your Situation and Proof of Criminality

Based on your description, you have a strong foundation for both criminal conspiracy and fraud:

Evidence you already have:

• Agreement to develop 35% extra for all members: This is a crucial piece of evidence. If you have a signed agreement stating this, it forms the basis of the false representation and the breach of contract.

• Only 20% extra for you: This directly shows the disparity and the false representation made to you.

• No basis in law for the discrimination: This weakens any defense the developer might raise about the differing percentages.

• Developer benefiting (tower parking, more commercial space): This establishes the motive and the "wrongful gain" for the developer.

• Other members benefiting (lucrative offer, twice the additional area): This indicates a potential "wrongful loss" to you and "wrongful gain" to them (if they were aware and complicit, which leads to conspiracy).

• Communication records of every involved party's awareness of the discrimination: This is extremely valuable. This directly proves:

  • Knowledge of falsity: The developer knew they were promising 35% to others while giving you only 20%.

  • Intention to deceive: Their continued action despite awareness proves intent.

  • Conspiracy: If other members or society representatives were aware and still went along with it, it indicates an agreement to cause you loss and benefit themselves/developer. This "meeting of minds" is key for criminal conspiracy.

  • Wilful nature: "Wilful" implies intent and knowledge, which are central to proving criminality.

Do you need more to prove criminality?

While your existing evidence is substantial, more evidence always strengthens a case. Here's what else would be beneficial, depending on what you already categorize as "communication records":

• Specific evidence of the "agreement" for 35%: Is it a clause in a master agreement, a separate annexure, board minutes, or specific communication?

• Proof of the actual area received vs. promised: Detailed architectural plans, measurement reports, or any official documents showing the 20% for you and the higher percentage for others.

• Valuation reports: Formal valuations by independent experts comparing the per-square-foot value of residential vs. commercial space in that prime location. This quantifies your loss and the developer's gain.

• Detailed communication records:

  • Emails, letters, meeting minutes: Specifically highlighting discussions about the 35% fungible FSI, the agreement to develop it for all, and then subsequent communication (even if "silent" or evasive) when you questioned your 20%.

  • WhatsApp chats, recordings (if legally obtained and permissible): These can be powerful if they explicitly show the parties discussing the discrepancy and their intent. (Be mindful of legalities around recording conversations in India).

  • Internal developer documents: Any internal memos, project plans, or financial projections that show their calculations of FSI distribution and the benefits derived from the "extra" space.

• Witness statements: If there are any individuals (e.g., former employees of the developer, disgruntled members) who can testify about the discussions or the understanding of the agreement.

• Expert opinion: An architect or real estate consultant can provide an expert opinion on the standard practices for FSI distribution in such development agreements and highlight the unusual nature of your situation.

Consider the distinction between Civil and Criminal:

• Civil Case: Your current evidence appears strong enough for a civil suit for breach of contract, fraud, and seeking specific performance or damages. The standard of proof is "preponderance of probability."

• Criminal Case: For criminal conspiracy and cheating, the standard of proof is "beyond reasonable doubt." This requires a higher level of certainty. The communication records showing awareness and continuation despite it are key to proving the criminal intent and agreement.

Steps you should consider:

1. Legal Consultation: Immediately consult with a lawyer specializing in real estate and criminal law in India. They can analyze your specific documents, advise on the best course of action (civil, criminal, or both), and guide you on collecting further admissible evidence.

2. Formal Notice: Your lawyer might advise sending a formal legal notice to the developer and the society, outlining the discrepancies and demanding your rightful share. This can sometimes lead to a resolution without further litigation.

3. Document Everything: Continue to meticulously document all communications, meetings, and actions related to this matter.

Will need to see the documents and orders passed in the matter 

Without that it's very difficult to comment 

Prima facie this appears to be a civil dispute 

The high court in its appeal has favored the developer, you could have approached supreme court with a SLP or you can note down your grievances and the injustice that the developer meted out to you besides his biased act of allotting more FSI to favored few and lesser FSI to the agitators.

This discrimination can be termed as an act of cheating however you can approach civil court with a suit for injunction to restrain the developer from proceeding with his proposed development if he is not satisfying all the members of the society.

The related papers are to be perused for more clear opinions, hence better consult your own advocate or any other experienced lawyer in the local and proceed as suggested

This is sufficient 

Yes, your facts suggest a prima facie case of criminal conspiracy, cheating, and misappropriation under IPC if you have written proof (emails, minutes, plans) showing all parties knowingly acted to deprive your rightful share.

Next Steps:

1. File SLP in Supreme Court within 90 days.

2. File RERA/MOFA complaint on violation of 75% consent and unequal treatment.

3. File police complaint or private criminal complaint in magistrate court for cheating and conspiracy, based on documented intent.

4. Speak publicly with caution — stick to facts to avoid defamation.

Collect all evidence and act swiftly with legal counsel.

Dear Sir/Madam,

From the inputs/information given by you, it is quite clear that there is case of wrongful gain to other persons and correspondig wrongful loss to you. This is clear criminal angle and you may highlight it for your benfit and file the appropriate cases/applications at all possible channels/forums. 

If an arbitration award in your favour has been set aside in appeal, your options are:

1. File a Special Leave Petition (SLP) in the Supreme Court challenging the appellate order.

2. If there are errors on the face of the record, you can also consider a review petition before the same High Court.

Regarding the redevelopment agreement:

• If you hold 25% of the area, you can challenge the validity of the agreement if 75% of consent was not properly obtained.

• Evidence showing that the builder and society intentionally discriminated against your commercial unit can also form the basis of separate civil proceedings for your share of benefits.

• Criminal action (cheating, conspiracy) is only possible if you have strong proof of deliberate misrepresentation and collusion.

Be cautious about making YouTube videos or public posts as these can invite defamation proceedings.