Also Read - Thane Court Grants Bail to Corporator Ramesh Mhatre

Findings on Obstruction of Stairways

Turning to the issue of flower pots in stairways, the High Court held that stairways are common areas meant for the free movement of all residents. The court observed that the trial court had failed to consider the practical consequences of keeping pots in these areas. It noted that watering the pots caused water to overflow onto the floor, rendering it slippery and obstructing the passage of residents.

The court stated that the plaintiffs had proved that keeping the pots and watering them resulted in a wet and slippery surface, which interfered with the right to free movement—a basic right enjoyed by every resident. Consequently, the High Court set aside the trial court’s decision on this point and ordered the association to remove all flower pots from stairways and corridors used by residents. It further directed that no material be kept in any common area that is in use by the members of the apartment.

Also Read - Brinda Karat Seeks Review of Supreme Court’s Clean Chit to Anurag Thakur and Parvesh Verma in Hate Speech Matter

Implications of the Judgment

The decision reinforces the principle that residents’ welfare associations cannot impose restrictions that infringe upon fundamental rights without clear, reasonable justification. By linking the right to play to the broader right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution, the judgment expands the scope of protections available to children in residential settings.

Regarding common areas, the ruling clarifies that any placement of objects that hinders free movement constitutes an unlawful obstruction. Associations must ensure that corridors, stairways and lobbies remain unobstructed and safe for all occupants. The mandate to hold a general body meeting within a specified period introduces a procedural safeguard, requiring associations to consult residents before framing rules that affect the use of shared facilities.

Also Read - Madras High Court Clarifies That Repeated Physical Intimacy Does Not Amount to Consent; Courts Must Probe Coercion and Deception

The judgment also highlights the duty of associations to manage common areas responsibly. The court’s insistence on removing potential hazards reflects a proactive approach to preventing accidents and ensuring the safety of residents.

Advocate BS Jeevan Kumar represented the petitioners throughout the proceedings. The judgment, delivered on 16 June 2026, is expected to be cited in future disputes concerning children’s recreational rights and the management of common spaces in cooperative housing societies.

Also Read - Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Conviction but Reduces Sentence in Child Rape Case