case dismissed
Share this

By Staff Reporter

In a recent virtual hearing conducted by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA), a complaint filed by Mr. Jaikumar Gajanand Gupta against Krishna Developers Pvt. Ltd. was dismissed. The complaint, registered under CC006000000198887, raised concerns regarding the construction of additional floors without proper consent in a project registered under MahaRERA.

Background of the Case:

Mr. Gupta, an allottee in a different project, challenged the construction activities undertaken by Krishna Developers in another project, arguing a violation of Section 14(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). He sought various reliefs, including a stay on construction and revocation of certain certificates issued to the developer.

Key Points from the Hearing:

During the hearing, both the complainant and respondent presented their arguments through legal representatives. Mr. Gupta contended that the construction violated RERA provisions, while Krishna Developers defended their actions, citing clauses from theĀ  agreement for sale where express consent given for further construction and amendment of plan etc and asserting the complainant’s lack of locus standi.

Observations and Dismissal:

In his observations, MahaRERA highlighted the doctrine of clean hands, emphasizing the complainant’s failure to comply with a previous order to pay costs, which undermined the credibility of their claim. Additionally, he delved into the legal principles of locus standi, emphasizing the need for direct interest and legitimate stake in the subject matter of a complaint. Given that Mr. Gupta was an allottee in a different project, the Chairperson concluded that he lacked legitimate standing in the current complaint, resulting in its dismissal.

Implications and Final Order:

The dismissal of the complaint underscores the importance of adherence to legal obligations and the principle of locus standi in legal proceedings. Mr. Gupta was directed to pay costs of Rs. 10,000/- to MahaRERA within 30 days from the date of the order.

Conclusion:

The decision by MahaRERA highlights the significance of procedural compliance and the principle of locus standi in addressing grievances related to real estate projects. It serves as a reminder of the legal framework governing dispute resolution under RERA and underscores the authority’s commitment to upholding transparency and fairness in its proceedings.

In conclusion, while the complaint filed by Mr. Gupta was dismissed, the case underscores the importance of procedural compliance and the need for legitimate standing in legal proceedings before regulatory authorities like MahaRERA.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *