Our Association Passed a Special Project Levy at the AGM That Was Not in the Notice: Am I Bound?

No. A general body binds its members only on business of which notice was given in the manner the registered bye-laws prescribe, and an apartment association AGM resolution not in the notice is open to challenge on that ground alone. A levy that funds a new capital project is special business: it needs its own agenda item, particulars that let an owner decide how to vote, and the majority the bye-laws fix for that class of decision. Your remedy is a written objection to the committee within days, then a challenge before the Registrar or the civil court with an injunction against collection, not silent non-payment, because an unpaid assessment becomes a charge on your unit under Section 19 of the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Act, 1972 until a court says the assessment was never lawfully made.

Part of the RERA and homebuyer disputes practice at S Jain & Attorneys, Bangalore.

This guide is for an owner in a Bengaluru apartment or gated villa community whose AGM notice listed "discussion on special projects" and whose minutes now record a sports facility on the open land, a rooftop court and an upgraded pool, approved with proxies counted from an attendance sheet and a dozen members on video, funded by a monthly levy per square foot. Who may cast a member's vote is in the post on who can lawfully vote at an AGM, and the fight for handover is in the post on forcing handover of the association and common areas.

Can an AGM decide something that was not on the agenda in the notice?

Only if the registered bye-laws allow it, and the model bye-laws do not. Section 16(1) of the 1972 Act says the administration of every property "shall be governed by bye-laws" annexed to the registered Declaration, Section 7 requires every owner to "comply strictly" with them, and Section 24(2) makes "decisions and determinations lawfully made by the Association of Apartment Owners in accordance with the voting percentages established under this Act, Declaration or bye-laws" binding on all owners. A decision taken at a meeting not called the way the bye-laws require is not "lawfully made", and Section 24(2) does not reach it.

The model bye-laws in the Karnataka Apartment Ownership Rules, 1975 (Exhibit B to the Form A Declaration) are the template most Bengaluru Declarations copy. Bye-law 16 makes it the Secretary's duty to send notice of "each annual or special meeting, stating the purpose thereof as well as the time and place". Bye-law 15 says "no other business shall be transacted at a special meeting except as stated in the notice without the consent of four-fifths of the owners present in person". Bye-law 14 lets the annual meeting elect the Board and "transact such other business of the Association as may properly come before them", and bye-law 18 puts "proof of notice of meeting or waiver of notice" second on the order of business. Business comes properly before an annual meeting when the notice stated it. "Discussion on special projects" is notice of a discussion, not of a resolution approving three named projects, their cost and a monthly charge per square foot.

In N.V.R. Nagappa Chettiar v. The Madras Race Club (Madras High Court, 5 October 1948, AIR 1951 Mad 831) a Division Bench set aside a members' club's general meeting because the statutory notice was short, recorded that "the notice should indicate the general nature of the business intended to be transacted at the meeting", and held that a mandatory notice requirement "can be dispensed with only by the agreement of all the members", so "it is not enough that the members present at the meeting indicated either expressly or impliedly they consented to or acquiesced". A committee that says an AGM can take up anything has the law backwards.

Key takeaway. Section 24(2) binds you to decisions "lawfully made" in accordance with the voting percentages. A resolution on business the notice never stated, passed with votes the bye-laws do not recognise, fails that test before anyone reaches the merits of the projects.

How much notice does the law require, and what must it contain?

The 1972 Act fixes no number of days: it makes the bye-laws fix it. Section 16(2)(b) requires the bye-laws to provide the "method of calling meetings of the apartment owners" and the quorum, and Section 16(3)(c) lets them regulate "annual and special general meetings". Model bye-law 16 requires notice to each owner at least two and not more than seven days before the meeting, stating its purpose, time and place, with a copy to the Registrar of Co-operative Societies as the "competent authority" under Section 3(i). Read the bye-laws actually annexed to your registered Declaration: "amended bye-laws" never registered and filed with the competent authority are not valid under Section 16(1).

A society under the 1960 Act works from its registered rules and regulations, which Section 6(2) requires to contain provisions on "general meetings, proceedings at such meetings including voting by members". The Act fixes a period only for the special general meeting that amends the rules or the objects: notice "delivered or sent by post to every member of the society twenty-one days previous to the date of the special general meeting" (Sections 9 and 10). Section 11(1) convenes the annual general meeting so that the management report and the audited accounts "shall be submitted for approval", and Section 11(3) lets one-tenth of the members entitled to vote requisition a special general meeting, stating the business in writing, to be held within forty days.

A co-operative housing society has the tightest frame: Section 27(1) of the 1959 Act lists the annual general meeting's business, ending with "consideration of any other matter which may be brought forward in accordance with the bye-laws", and Section 28(1) obliges the committee to call a special general meeting within a month of a requisition "to transact a specified business". The Karnataka High Court held on 3 March 2026 that a co-operative is not the vehicle for a completed residential project under the 1972 Act (Sobha Limited v. Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Writ Petition 5934 of 2024).

Before you write a word to the committee, these are the papers to have on the desk.

What majority does a capital project or a new levy need?

The majority the bye-laws fix for that class of business, counted the way the Declaration counts votes. Under Section 3(n) a "majority" means owners with "fifty-one per cent or more of the votes in accordance with the percentages assigned in the Declaration", Section 11(1)(f) makes the percentage of undivided interest the measure "for all purposes, including voting", and model bye-law 9 says "voting shall be on a percentage basis", so a head count is the wrong arithmetic. Model bye-law 12 gives the Association the job of "approving the budget, establishing and collecting monthly assessments", with resolutions requiring "approval by a majority of owners, casting votes in person", and bye-law 39 makes assessments "pro rata according to the value of the unit owned, as stipulated in the Declaration".

A levy is a common expense only if it fits Section 3(g): sums "lawfully assessed against the apartment owners by the Association", expenses of "administration, maintenance, repair or replacement of the common areas and facilities", or expenses agreed or declared as common expenses by the bye-laws or the Declaration. A sports facility, a rooftop court and an upgraded pool are none of maintenance, repair or replacement. They are additions or improvements, and Section 6(5) says the making of "any additions or improvements" to the common areas "shall be carried out only as provided herein and in the bye-laws". So the first question is which bye-law authorises the Association to build new facilities at all. Model bye-law 4(2) says the Association "shall not act beyond the scope of its object without duly amending the provisions of these bye-laws for the purpose", and the model objects cover maintenance, repair, replacement and "recreative activities". Amending the bye-laws under model bye-law 56 takes owners representing "at least 75 per cent of the total value of all units", and amending the Declaration under Form A clause 17 takes "at least 66 2/3 per cent in number and in common interest of all apartment owners", registered before it takes effect. A simple majority on a two-line notice is a long way from either.

Under the 1960 Act the majority is whatever the registered rules fix, and the Act's own thresholds show what serious business needs: votes in favour "not less than three times the number of the votes" against to change the rules or objects (Sections 9 and 10), three-fifths of members present for a penalty bye-law (Section 18). Under the 1972 Act the basis of the levy is statutory: Section 10 charges common expenses "according to the percentage of the undivided interest in the common areas and facilities", so a per-square-foot rate that departs from the Declaration's percentages is open to challenge as well.

Do proxies and online attendance count?

Only where the registered bye-laws or rules say so, and an attendance sheet is never a proxy. The model bye-laws permit no proxies: bye-law 10 makes the quorum "the presence in person of a majority of owners", bye-law 11 says "votes shall be cast in person", and bye-law 17 adjourns a meeting without a quorum for at least forty-eight hours. A committee counting proxies under bye-laws that copy the model is counting votes that do not exist. Wherever the 1960 Act mentions proxies it adds "where proxies are allowed", which makes the registered rules the only source of the right, and Section 2(b) removes the vote of a member whose subscription "shall have been in arrear for a period exceeding three months". Section 21(1) of the 1959 Act says every member "shall exercise his vote in person and not by proxy".

Video attendance is a separate point. Nothing in the three Acts or the model bye-laws contemplates a member who joins by video, and a bye-law that fixes "the time and place" of a meeting and counts a quorum "in person" does not stretch to a screen without an amendment that says so. Who may vote for an owner that is a company or a trust is in the post on lawful voters at an AGM.

Can they build on land that is not ours: BDA-relinquished or civic amenity land?

Not without the landowner's written consent and a planning sanction, and in a Bengaluru layout the open land your community treats as its own may belong to the Bangalore Development Authority. Section 32(5) of the Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 lets the Authority, before sanctioning a layout, require the applicant to agree "to transfer the ownership of the roads, drains, water supply mains and open spaces laid out by him to the Authority permanently without claiming any compensation therefor". That relinquishment is why the park at the end of your road is not in your Declaration. Section 2(bb) defines "civic amenity", and Section 38A(2) says the Authority "shall not sell or otherwise dispose of any area reserved for public parks and playgrounds and civic amenities, for any other purpose and any disposition so made shall be null and void".

Under the 1972 Act the common areas begin with "the land on which the building is located" (Section 3(f)(1)), which the Declaration must describe (Section 11(1)(a)). If the site of the proposed facility is outside that land, the Association has no more right to build on it than a stranger, and a levy for a structure on someone else's land is a levy for an unlawful purpose whatever the vote.

Is a rooftop court or an upgraded pool an alteration of a common facility?

Yes. A court on the clubhouse roof and a new upgraded pool plant are additions or improvements to the common areas, which Section 6(5) allows only as the Act and the bye-laws provide. Section 3(f) lists the roofs, the yards and gardens, "installations of central services, such as power, light, gas, hot and cold water, heating" and "such community and commercial facilities as may be provided for in the Declaration" among the common areas and facilities. The Declaration describes the common areas as built and is registered with an architect's verified floor plans (Sections 11(1)(d) and 13(2)), so a new structure changes the property the Declaration describes. Section 8 shows how seriously the Act treats new structures even for a single owner, who may not "add any material structure" without "the unanimous consent of all the other apartment owners". A committee that wants a rooftop court therefore needs, in this order, a bye-law object that covers it, a resolution passed on proper notice with the bye-law majority, a structural engineer's certificate, and the building sanction that new construction needs.

Am I bound to pay the levy, and what happens if I refuse?

You are bound by a valid resolution and not by an invalid one, and the risk of guessing wrong sits with you. Section 17 stops an owner escaping "liability for his contribution towards the common expenses by waiver of the use or enjoyment of any of the common areas and facilities", Section 19 makes "all sums assessed by the Association of Apartment owners but unpaid" a charge on the apartment "prior to all other charges" except government and municipal taxes and a first mortgage, and Section 20 carries unpaid assessments to a purchaser jointly with the seller. Section 7 lets the Board, "or, in a proper case by an aggrieved apartment owner", bring "an action to recover sums due for damages or injunctive relief or both". Model bye-law 8 takes away the vote in Board elections of an owner in arrears "for more than 60 days".

Under the 1960 Act a society sues a member "in arrear of a subscription which according to the rules of the society, he is bound to pay" (Section 19), a pecuniary penalty under a valid bye-law "may be recovered in any court having jurisdiction" (Section 18), and under the 1959 Act a demand due from a member is a dispute for the Registrar (Section 70(2)(a)).

The practical rule: keep paying the ordinary maintenance in full and on time, because that liability does not depend on the disputed resolution. For the levy itself, either pay under a written protest that reserves your right to recover it if the resolution falls, or withhold only the levy with a written objection served before the first due date and a challenge filed promptly after it. Do not stop everything and say nothing, because Section 19 attaches to "sums assessed" and a court asked to enforce the charge will ask why you never objected.

Deadline warning. The first levy due date is your deadline for the written objection. Every silent payment reads as acceptance, and every unpaid instalment becomes a charge on the unit under Section 19 the day it falls due, so the objection, the protest payment or the suit has to be on record before that date.

Where do I challenge the resolution?

In the civil court for an association under the 1972 Act, before the Registrar first for a society under the 1960 Act, and before the Registrar alone for a co-operative. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 gives the civil court jurisdiction over "all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred", and neither the 1972 Act nor the 1960 Act bars a suit for a declaration that a resolution is void and an injunction against collecting under it. Order 39 Rule 2 covers any suit "for restraining the defendant from committing a breach of contract or other injury of any kind", and the three tests are in the post on temporary injunctions under Order 39. The writ court is closed. In M.J. Mathew v. Prestige St. Johns Wood Apartment Owners Association (Karnataka High Court, 7 August 2023, Writ Petition 2881 of 2016) the court dismissed a challenge to a levy inserted by a bye-law amendment because a private association of apartment owners "does not qualify to be a 'State' under Article 12" and the only remedy is "to challenge the amendment of the bye-laws" of the association "before the competent Civil Court".

For a society, Section 25(1) of the 1960 Act says the Registrar "shall on the application of the majority of the members of the governing body or of not less than one-third of the members of the society, hold an enquiry" into its "constitution, working and financial condition", and Section 25(2) lets him take the books, examine on oath and "require the governing body of the society to call a general meeting" on the matters he directs, notwithstanding any rule on the notice period, or call it himself. Section 25 gives him no power to set aside a resolution, so the civil suit remains the route to a binding declaration, but a Registrar-directed meeting on a proper notice often makes the suit unnecessary. For a co-operative, Section 70(1) of the 1959 Act sends "any dispute touching the constitution, management, or the business" of the society to the Registrar and bars the civil court.

Two forums do not fit: K-RERA, which regulates promoters and allottees and not a post-handover quarrel between owners and their own association, and the consumer commission, because the validity of a resolution your association passed is not a service you bought.

The Karnataka Apartment (Ownership and Management) Bill, 2026: does it change any of this?

Not yet, and not on the notice point even when it does. The Bill was published as L.A. Bill No. 14 of 2026 in the Karnataka Gazette, Part IVA, No. 745 of 19 August 2026 and passed both Houses that month, and as at the date of writing no assent or commencement notification has been verified, so the 1972 Act and the 1960 Act remain the law in force. Clause 1(2) brings it into force on a notified date, clause 1(5) keeps out plotted developments whose roads, parks and civic amenities are handed to the local authority unless common areas are run through an association, and clause 66 repeals the 1972 Act and the Karnataka Ownership of Flats Act, 1972. On meetings it does what the 1972 Act does, requiring the bye-laws to fix the manner of convening annual and special general meetings, the quorum, and "the percentage of votes required for various decisions" (clause 35). On money it goes further: maintenance charges in general proportionate to super built-up area (clause 25(2)(a)), every owner liable for "the maintenance charges and capital contributions assessed by the association" whether or not he uses the facilities (clause 25(3)), capital contributions a charge on the apartment (clause 20), no withholding of "water supply, electricity, sanitation, lift services, fire safety systems or access to the apartment" from a defaulter (clause 20(6)), and alteration or reconstruction of a building only with "not less than seventy-five percent of the apartment owners" and planning approval (clause 24(6)). Disputes about maintenance charges and the association's management would go to a Competent Authority (clause 53), with clause 60 barring the civil court. Until a commencement notification appears none of this applies, and even then a levy passed without the notice the bye-laws require would not be an assessment made in accordance with the Act.

Step by step for an objecting owner

1. Get the documents the same week: the registered Declaration with its bye-laws and land schedule, the notice with its dispatch date, the attendance sheet, any proxy forms, and the minutes with the vote count. Section 16(2)(d) requires a minute book.
2. Write to the committee before the first levy date, stating the defect precisely: the notice did not state the business, the bye-law period or manner was not followed, proxies and remote votes were counted without a bye-law, and the resolution exceeds the Association's objects. Ask for the vote count and the sanction and land documents, and prove delivery.
3. Pay the regular maintenance in full and deal with the levy in writing, under protest or withheld with the objection on record.
4. Requisition a special general meeting under the bye-laws, or under Section 11(3) of the 1960 Act with one-tenth of the members, stating the resolution you want voted, so the question is decided on a proper notice.
5. For a society, apply to the Registrar under Section 25 with one-third of the members if the committee refuses the meeting or the accounts.
6. If the committee proceeds, file the suit for a declaration and injunction with an Order 39 application before a contractor is appointed, joining the association through the officer its bye-laws or Section 15 of the 1960 Act name.
7. Ask for interim protection against both the collection and the construction, and offer to deposit the disputed levy in court.
8. Once a proper meeting is held on a proper notice, accept the result if the bye-law majority still supports the projects, because a validly passed levy binds you under Section 24(2).

Timelines and indicative costs

Indicative, not promised. The objection letter is a matter of days. A requisitioned meeting under Section 11(3) of the 1960 Act must be called within ten days and held within forty days, and model bye-law 15 makes it the President's duty to call a special meeting on a petition signed by a majority of owners. In the Bengaluru city civil courts an interim application under Order 39 is usually argued within weeks of filing and the suit itself runs for years, so the interim order is the real battle. An owners' group that stops at the objection-and-requisition stage usually spends in the tens of thousands of rupees, and a contested suit with interim applications runs into a few lakh rupees over its life, shared among the objectors.

Three numbers decide most of these meetings, and they are worth carrying into the room.

Mistakes owners make

What I tell people at the first meeting is that these disputes are decided on the notice and the minutes, not on whether a rooftop court is a good idea. Where these cases actually turn is on three documents: the notice as dispatched, the registered bye-laws as annexed to the Declaration, and the minutes with the count. An owner who arrives with those three and a copy of his objection letter is in a different position from one who arrives with forty screenshots of a residents' group, and an objector who demands a fresh meeting on a proper notice instead of merely opposing the projects is much harder to paint as the obstacle.

The mistakes repeat. Posting the objection on the residents' group instead of serving it on the committee, so that nothing is on record when the suit is filed. Stopping all payments, which converts a procedural challenge into an arrears defence and hands the association Section 19. Waiting until the contractor is on site, when a judge weighing the balance of convenience under Order 39 sees money already spent and a half-built structure. And filing a writ petition, which the High Court dismissed in the Prestige St. Johns Wood matter because the association is a private body.

Common mistake. Treating the levy and the maintenance as one bill and withholding both. The maintenance liability exists under Section 17 whatever happens to the resolution. Pay it, object to the levy in writing, and let the court or the Registrar decide the levy.

Frequently Asked Questions

This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice on your specific situation.

Related Guides

Our property and real estate practice reads Declarations and bye-laws and advises owners and committees on levies and general meetings, and our civil litigation practice files the declaration and injunction suits that decide them.

• Who Can Lawfully Vote in a Society or Company AGM?
• Three Years After Possession the Builder Still Runs Our Building: Forcing Handover of the Association, Common Areas and Corpus
• Temporary Injunction Under Order 39 CPC: How to Get One