Share this

RERABy Fiona Mehta

In the 5 separate complainants (Complaint Nos. CC006000000056539, CC006000000197465, CC006000000198655, CC006000000199126 and Cco06000000199135) were clubbed together seeking various reliefs from MahaRERA against the respondents promoters under the provisions of sections 7,13,18 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as RERA) with respect of the booking of their respective flats in the respondent’s registered project known as “Samaj Darshan” at Borivali, Mumbai.

Facts of the complaints: The complainants at sr. nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 are project allottees who have purchased their respective units from the promoter’s former allottees by completing registered agreements for sale. The complainants have primarily claimed that they purchased their units from the former promoter by signing a documented agreement for sale.

However, a conflict arose between the former promoter and the owner in 2017, prompting the owner to file a complaint with the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature in Bombay under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Accordingly, the owner has appointed new promoter as promoter of this project and the MahaRERA has also confirmed the said appointment. Hence, the complainants have approached MahaRERA seeking various reliefs under the provisions of section 18 of the RERA.

The project was shifted to another promoter by MahaRERA without informing the former promoter and without taking into account the interests of all associated parties, according to the former promoter. It is responsible for around half of the project’s construction activity. The MahaRERA registering authority transferred the project to M/s. H Rishabhraj without safeguarding the rights of any stakeholders, including the complainant in this case. There will be a breach of natural justice if the current stakeholders’ rights are not protected. It will also have to face a significant personal loss.

Order: The MahaRERA has observed that the new promoter appointed by the owner trust pursuant to the order dated 26-11-2020 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Commercial Division Notice of Motion No. 99 of 2020 in Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 147 of 2018 along with Commercial Arbitration Application No. 54 of 2018 in Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 147 of 2018. The complainants are simply asking for the MahaRERA registration given to the respondents under section 7 of the RERA to be revoked. However, after reviewing the records, MahaRERA discovered that on January 21, 2022, the Hon’ble Chairperson of MahaRERA issued an order in Suo-Motu Case No. 215 of 2022.

In view of the aforesaid subsequent order passed by the Hon’ble Chairperson, MahaRERA the claim of the complainants for revocation of the MahaRERA registration cannot be considered since, the said project is revived, and the project validity period is extended till 30-04-2023.Hence, the main relief sought by the said complaints stands rejected.

In terms of the additional reliefs sought by the complainants under section 13 of the RERA, the MahaRERA has prima facie determined that there are six complainants claiming to be allottees of this project who have filed a common complaint agitating their individual claims under section 13 of the RERA. The complainants have not even supplied copies of the allotment letters payment receipts lawfully issued in their favour in this project to verify their claim under section 13 of the RERA when submitting this complaint.

Final Order: The owner is further directed to pay interest for the delayed possession to the complainants at sr. nos. 2, 3 and 5 from the agreed dates of possession mentioned in the agreements for every month till the actual date of possession with occupancy certificate on the actual amount paid by the complainants towards the consideration of their flats. Thereby, all 5 complaints stand disposed of.