In a landmark ruling, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has clarified that landowners are not entitled to seek relief against developers under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA). This decision, dated February 20, 2025, came after a complaint was filed by Swastik Real Estate Developers, a partnership firm that sold land to Mahindra Happinest Developers in Kalyan, Mumbai.
The MahaRERA Case: Background
Swastik Real Estate Developers sold 36,635 square meters of land to Mahindra Happinest Developers for ₹90.20 crore in July 2018. A deed of conveyance was signed between the parties in November 2019, formalizing the deal. However, Swastik Real Estate Developers claimed that they had not yet received ₹8.50 crore of the purchase consideration, along with the applicable interest.
In August 2020, Swastik filed a complaint with MahaRERA after receiving a letter from the developer that raised a dispute concerning the land. Mahindra Happinest Developers contended that a portion of the land had not been conveyed by the landowner due to unresolved litigation, thus preventing them from completing the payment. The developer argued that since the title of the land was defective, Swastik was not entitled to the outstanding balance.
Despite these claims, Swastik approached MahaRERA seeking a direction to the developer to pay the remaining ₹8.50 crore along with interest.
Developer’s Argument Before MahaRERA
In their defence, Mahindra Happinest Developers argued that Swastik Real Estate Developers, as the former owner of the project land, did not qualify as an allottee under RERA. According to the developer, RERA provisions apply exclusively to allottees, promoters, and real estate agents. Since Swastik did not meet these criteria, the complaint filed by them lacked legal standing or locus standi.
Furthermore, the developer maintained that dispute resolution under RERA is only applicable to allottees, promoters, or real estate agents. As the landowner was neither an allottee nor promoter, they were not eligible to invoke the dispute resolution mechanism under RERA.
MahaRERA’s Ruling: Landowners Do Not Qualify as Allottees
In a decisive ruling, MahaRERA dismissed Swastik’s complaint, stating that the landowner did not qualify as an allottee under Section 2(d) of the RERA Act. The regulatory authority reasoned that Swastik failed to establish an allottee-promoter relationship, which is a prerequisite for invoking the provisions of the RERA Act.
The order further emphasized that in order to be considered an aggrieved person under Section 31 of RERA, the complainant must be an allottee, promoter, or real estate agent. Since Swastik did not meet these criteria, they were not entitled to relief under the act.
Thus, the MahaRERA order concluded that the complaint was “not maintainable,” and dismissed the case.
Developer’s Response to the MahaRERA Ruling
In a statement, Mahindra Lifespaces, the parent company of Mahindra Happinest Developers, clarified their position regarding the case. They reiterated that Swastik Real Estate Developers had filed a complaint with MahaRERA seeking payment of the outstanding consideration, but the authority rejected the complaint, citing that Swastik did not qualify as an allottee under RERA.
Additionally, Mahindra Lifespaces noted that Swastik had also filed a civil suit for the same claim, but the court ruled in favour of Mahindra Happinest Developers, dismissing Swastik’s claim.
Despite the legal setbacks, Mahindra Lifespaces maintained a positive relationship with Swastik Real Estate Developers.
The Impact of the MahaRERA Decision
This ruling by MahaRERA brings clarity to the scope of the RERA Act, specifically regarding the eligibility of landowners to seek relief under its provisions. Landowners who are not involved in the development process, either as promoters or allottees, will not be able to use RERA as a platform for dispute resolution against developers.
The judgment underscores the need for landowners to explore other legal avenues, such as civil courts, when disputes arise regarding payment or land ownership issues. The decision also serves as a reminder to developers and landowners alike to ensure that all contractual obligations are met and that titles are clear before engaging in land transactions.
Conclusion
The MahaRERA order sets a precedent in the realm of real estate law in Maharashtra by clarifying that only allottees, promoters, or real estate agents can seek relief under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. Landowners, such as Swastik Real Estate Developers, who are not part of the project development process, do not have the legal standing to file complaints with MahaRERA.