RERA Cases Half Yearly Digest : January -June,2024
Aryan Raj
8 July 2024 3:00 AM GMT
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA) The Ministry Of Housing And Urban Affairs Releases Report On The Implementation Status Of The Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA) has released the implementation status report of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016, commonly known as RERA, in...
Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA)
The Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MOHUA) has released the implementation status report of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016, commonly known as RERA, in India.
Karnataka High Court
Case: Sri Mathew Thomas V/S State of Karnataka
The Karnataka High Court bench comprising of Justice M. Nagaprasanna has directed the State government of Karnataka to expeditiously appoint chairperson and members to Karnataka Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT), which has become non-functional due to these vacant posts.
Bombay High Court
Case: Wadhwa Group Housing Private Ltd V/s. Mr. Vijay Choksi and SSS Escatics Pvt. Ltd
The Bombay High Court bench, comprising of Justice Sandeep V. Marne, has held that promoters who are part of a real estate project but haven't received any consideration from the allottee will still be classified as “Promoters” under Section 2(zk).
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA)
No. MahaRERA/CC / 729 / 2024
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) took a significant step forward by unveiling draft model guidelines to meet the unique requirements of senior citizen housing projects. This makes MahaRERA the first housing regulatory body in India to formalize regulations specifically for retirement housing projects.
Maharashtra RERA Grants Fourth Extension To Adhiraj Constructions To Complete Project
Regulatory Case No. 171,172, & 173 Of 2024
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) bench, comprising of Ajoy Mehta (Chairperson), granted a one-and-a-half-year extension to Adhiraj Constructions Private Limited to complete its three towers, namely Tower 1A, 1B, and 3B, which are part of the Adhiraj Samyama project, for the fourth time.
No. MahaRERA/Secy/129/2024
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has released a discussion paper addressing the maintenance and operation of bank accounts for registered real estate projects.
MahaRERA Orders Deregistration Of 'Nishuvi Rehab Phase' From RERA
Regulatory Case NO.62 OF 2023
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) bench comprising of Justice Ajay Mehta (Chairperson), Mahesh Pathak (Member - I) and Ravindra Deshpande (Member - II), has ordered the deregistration of Nishuvi Rehab Phase from RERA after the builder failed to continue with the construction of the project.
MahaRERA To Start Grading Real Estate Projects On Four Parameters Every Six Months From April 2024
MahaRERA/Secy /File No. 27/1166/2023
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) plans to implement a grading system for real estate projects starting from April 2024. All projects initiated from January 2023 onwards will undergo assessment by the regulatory body as part of this initiative, which is aimed at providing information about these parameters to homebuyers to assist them in making decisions.
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) bench, comprising of Ajoy Mehta (Chairperson), Mahesh Pathak (Member) and Ravindra (Member), has appoints Chandak Realtors Private Limited as the new Promoter of the Anantya 1A & 1B Project located in Kurla after the former promoter failed to implement the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) Scheme for the redevelopment of three societies.
MahaRERA: A Real Estate Project Cannot Have Two Or Multiple Registration Numbers
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) bench, comprising of Ajoy Mehta (Chairperson), and Mahesh Pathak (Member), has held that as per Section 5(1)(a) of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, a real estate project cannot have two or multiple registration numbers.
Maharashtra RERA Releases Order Mandating Detailed Disclosure Of Amenities In Sale Agreements
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has released order mandating builders to disclose the details about the amenities to homebuyers that will be provided to them in the project in sale agreements.
Maharashtra RERA Releases Draft Regulation for Quality Assurance, Invites Suggestions and Views
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has released a draft regulation aimed at enhancing the quality of construction in the real estate sector. This initiative aligns with the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, particularly Section 14(3), which mandates prompt rectification of structural defects and other issues brought to the promoter's notice within five years of possession.
Case Title – Upasna Bajaj Versus Lokhandwala Kataria Construction Pvt Ltd & others
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising of Justice Mahesh Pathak (Member – I), has directed builder to handover the possession of flat to homebuyer following many years of delay. The flat, which was initially allocated to the homebuyer in 2010, has been subject to prolonged delays.
MahaRERA – Dispute Arising Out Of Development Agreement Is Not Maintainable
Case - Pulin Co-Operative Housing Society Limited Versus Tirupati Developers
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Mahesh Pathak (Member), held that there is no provision in the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which empowers the authority to entertain disputes arising out of a development agreement, such disputes fall under the jurisdiction of the Civil court. Consequently, the authority dismissed the complaint of the Housing society/Complainant.
MahaRERA Grants 4-Year Extension To RSM Homes To Complete Their Unimont Coral Project
Citation - REGULATORY CASE NO. 225 OF 2024
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising of Ajoy Mehta (Chairperson), granted a 4-year extension to RSM Homes LLP Ltd for its Project Unimont Coral under Section 7(3) of the RERA 2016. In total, this is the fourth extension of the project, the other three extensions were granted by authority on the grounds of Covid-19 under Section 6 of RERA 2016.
Case - Marvel Aquanas Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd Versus Marvel Realtors & Developers Limited and Others
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ajoy Mehta (Chairperson), has directed the builder to apply for a Project extension, complete the construction, and hand over possession to the homebuyer.
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
MahaREAT Orders Larsen And Toubro (L&T) To Pay Interest For The Delayed Possession To The Homebuyer
Case - M/s. L &T Parel Project LLP Versus Nirmala Gill and others
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has ordered L & T Parel project LLP to pay interest to the allottee for the delayed possession of the flat, which the allottee booked in the L & T Crescent Bay Project Parel, Mumbai.
Case : Sushama Sakharam Malvankar V/S AAP Realtors Ltd and others
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT/Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held that If a homebuyer has given an express written undertaking stating that all their concerns have been addressed and resolved, they are not allowed to later change their mind and raise the same issues again while seeking the same type of relief through an appeal.
Case - M/s. Aditya Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. & another Versus Mrs, Mrunmai Mahesh Phadke & others
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held the construction firm liable for the misapplication of consideration money by the erstwhile partner. The consideration money of Rs. 22 lakh was paid by the homebuyers to the erstwhile partner of the construction firm to book a flat.
Case: Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd vs Mrs. Regina D'Costa
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') bench comprising of Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and DR. K. Shivaji (Technical Member) has held that rights of allottees under Section 18 to seek refund/ claim interest for delay is unconditional & absolute, regardless of unforeseen events and factors beyond control of Promotor.
Case: Sachin Tomar And Shivaji Tomar Vs Ensaara Metropark Luxora Infrastructure Pvt, Ltd.
The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held that a written expressed agreement for sale is not a requirement for the allottee to avail the rights stipulated under Section 18 of the RERA. Instead, what matters more is the intention of the parties, not the nomenclature of the document.
Case: Sachin Tomar And Shivaji Tomar Vs Ensaara Metropark Luxora Infrastructure Pvt, Ltd.
The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held that even if the allotment letter has been issued to allottees under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the promotion of construction, sale, management, and transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA), the real estate project will still be covered under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) if the real estate project has been registered under RERA.
Case: Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd vs Mrs. Regina D'Costa
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') bench comprising of Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and DR. K. Shivaji (Technical Member) has held, that provisions of the RERA, 2016, are prospective in nature and applicable to all agreements for sale executed prior to the enactment of the act, or under any previous legislation in force at that time.
Case: Veena Realcon pvt. Ltd. VS Mr. Shivkumar Inamdar
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT/Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has granted interest to homebuyer for delayed possession by rejecting the builder's contention of late approval of Occupation Certificate due to internal disputes between Maharashtra Housing and Development Authority (MHADA) and Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) regarding the issuance of approvals.
Case: Kakad Housing Corporation VS Rajkumari Singh and another
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT/Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held that the mere non-execution of the Agreement for Sale does not preclude homebuyers from invoking Section 18 of RERA, which confers an unqualified right upon the homebuyer to get refund of amount with interest if builder fails to complete the project or is unable to give possession of the flat on agreed timeline.
Case: Kakad Housing Corporation VS Rajkumari Singh and another
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT/Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice Shri Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has held that demanding additional payment from homebuyers after receiving over 20% of the flat price for executing the agreement for sale is illegal. Consequently, the MahaREAT held the builder's termination of the letter of intent upon the homebuyers' failure to make the demanded payment as illegal.
Maha REAT – Carpet Area Mentioned in Agreement of Sale Will Supersede All Other Documents
Case – Kamal Kishore Uniyal Versus Accord Builders
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') bench comprising of Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and DR. K. Shivaji (Technical Member) has held that in case there are discrepancies or contradictions regarding the carpet area in various documents related to the property (Challan and Draft Agreement), the carpet area specified in the Agreement of Sale will be considered the authoritative and binding measurement.
MahaREAT Dismisses Builder's Application For Condonation Of 380-Day Delay In Filing Appeal
Case – M/s. Shree Sadguru & Deluxe JV Versus R. Jayanti Rani & Anr
The bench of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has dismissed the builder's application for condonation of a 380-day delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
MahaREAT Dismisses Builder's Application For Condonation Of 380-Day Delay In Filing Appeal
Case – M/s. Shree Sadguru & Deluxe JV Versus R. Jayanti Rani & Anr
The bench of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has dismissed the builder's application for condonation of a 380-day delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.
Case – Kunal Kashyap & another Versus M/S Atul Enterprises
The bench of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), refuses to adjudicate the homebuyer's appeal concerning registration of a real estate project due to the ongoing injunction issued by the Pune Civil Court prohibiting the builder from doing any construction on the existing building.
MahaREAT Orders Builder To Pay Interest To Homebuyer For Delay In Providing Possession
Case – Adv. Mr. Prashant M. Sane Versus M/s. vital Developers Private Ltd and another
The bench of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'), comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member), has directed the builder to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delay in providing possession of the flat. As per the agreement for sale, the builder was supposed to hand over possession of the flat by 31st March 2019.
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority
Case Title: Shashi Saha and Another vs Manglam Multiplex Private Limited
The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram bench comprising of Ashok Sangwan (Member) held Manglam Multiplex Private Limited liable for forfeiture of earnest money paid by the Complainants after the Complainants cancelled the booking for a unit in Section 65 of Gurugram. The bench directed it to refund the earnest money paid by the Complainant and reiterated the allottee's unequivocal and absolute right to seek a refund if the promoter fails to deliver possession within the stipulated time.
Case : Deepak Gupta V/S M/S Jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd and Sanjay Gupta & Ekta Gupta V/S M/S Jasmine Buildmart Pvt. Ltd
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising of Justice Ashok Sangwan (Member) has granted the homebuyer permission to withdraw from the real estate project due to delayed possession. Accordingly, the Authority directed the builder to refund the entire amount paid by the homebuyer, along with interest.
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) comprising of Justice Ashok Sangwan (Member) orders builder to refund the amount with interest to the complainant and holds him liable for wrongly calculating the total price of the unit based on its super built-up area instead of its carpet area.
Case: Uddipta Bimal Borah & another VS Ramprashtha Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Another
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) comprising Justice Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed the builder to refund the entire amount paid by the homebuyer with interest, rejecting the builder's contention that the homebuyer is not a consumer but an investor. Thus, the homebuyer is not entitled to file a complaint before the authority.
Case : Babu Lal Gupta & another V/S New look builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) comprising Justice Vijay Kumar Goyal (Member), has held that the offer of possession made by the builder before obtaining the Occupation Certificate from local authorities is invalid and contrary to the law. Accordingly, the authority directed the builder to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delayed possession.
Haryana RERA: Provisions Of the Limitation Act, 1963, Do Not Apply To RERA
Case - Babu Lal Gupta & another V/S New look builders and Developers Pvt Ltd
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) comprising Justice Vijay Kumar Goyal (Member), has held that the provisions under Section 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963, which stipulate a limitation period of 3 years for a specific performance suit, do not apply to complaints under RERA. Consequently, the authority held that the complaint filed by the homebuyer after three years from the date the cause of action will be maintainable before the authority.
Case – Kapil Poddar and Renuka Poddar versus M/s Ramprastha Promoters & Developers Private Limited along with Shashikant Singh versus M/s Ramprastha Promoters & Developers Private Limited
The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority), bench comprising Justice Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed the builder to hand over possession of the flat to the Homebuyer and to pay interest for the delay in possession. The possession of the flat, initially scheduled for transfer in 2012 as per the agreement, has been subject to significant delays by the builder.
Increasing Super Built Up Area Without Prior Permission Of Complainant Is Bad In Eyes Of Law
Case – Sohan Lal Swamy Versus Rajdarbar Assets Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice Ashok Sangwan (Member), has held that a builder increasing the super built-up area of a booked flat from 707 sq. ft. to 874.09 sq. ft. without any prior permission from the complainant is bad in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the Authority has quashed the builder's demand letter requesting additional payment from the complainant due to the increase in super built-up area.
Case – Dr. Vivek Mahendru S/o Devi Dass Mahendru (Through SPA holder Vijay Kapur) Versus M/s Raheja Developers Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer to purchase a flat, after the builder failed to hand over possession even after a delay of seven years and six months.
Case – Pranshu Dutt & another Versus M/s Raheja Developers Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed the builder to compensate homebuyers for a delay of over 4.1 years in handing over possession of the flat, whose due date for possession was April 6, 2020.
Case - Jogender Singh Malik Versus TDI Infrastructure Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority), Panchkula bench, comprising of Dr. Geeta Rathee Singh (Member) and Chander Shekhar (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer to purchase a flat with 10.85% interest, after the builder failed to hand over possession even after a delay of eleven years.
Case – Dilbag Sharma & another Versus M3M India Private Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), upholds the builder's termination of the flat booking after the homebuyer failed to fulfill timely payment obligations.
Haryana RERA Orders Interest To Homebuyer For Delayed Possession, Also Holds Agreement Is Biased
Case – Arun Jain & another Versus M/S Emaar India Ltd.
While holding the buyer's agreement terms biased in favour of the builder, the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sanjeev Kumar Arora (Member), has directed the builder to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delay in handing over possession.
Builder Fails To Provide Monthly Returns On Booked Unit, Haryana RERA Orders Refund To Complainant
Case – Reena Devi & another Versus M/s Landmark Apartments Private Limited
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sanjeev Kumar Arora (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the complainant for a unit in the commercial real estate project named Landmark Cyber Park, after the builder failed to pay the monthly return of Rs. 46,000.
Case – Lalit Kumar Versus BPTP Ltd.
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sanjeev Kumar Arora (Member), has directed the builder to pay interest for the delay in handing over possession and pass on the benefit of the increased super built-up area to the homebuyer without imposing additional costs in the total sale consideration.
Case – Neeraj Singh Bhadouria & another Versus M/s Godrej Developers and Promoters LLP
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sanjeev Kumar Arora (Member), dismissed the homebuyer's allegation that Godrej Developers misrepresented their joint venture project as solely developed and marketed by them. Additionally, the Authority refused to refund the booking amount to the homebuyer.
Case – Kiran Kumar Versus M/s Signature Global (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sanjeev Kumar Arora (Member), has directed Signature Global India Private Limited, the builder, to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delay in handing over possession. Additionally, the Authority also held that the terms of the agreement are biased in favor of the builder.
Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
Case Title: Selvaraj Damiyon Raju & anr vs Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') bench comprising of Justice Rajan Gupta (Chairman) and Anil Kumar Gupta (Technical Member), has held that the Affordable Housing Policy (amendment) 2019 cannot be applied retrospectively to alter the financial obligations outlined in the pre-existing agreement. Accordingly, the tribunal has set aside the order dated 27.09.2022, issued by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority ('Authority').
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
TNREAT Orders Hiranandani Realtors To Register The Entire Township Project Under RERA As One Unit
Case Title: M/Hiranandani Realtors Private Limited vs Hiranandani Amalfi Owners Association
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy (Chairperson) and R. Padmanabhan (Judicial Member), has ordered Hiranandani Realtors to register the entire Township project, which includes many high-rise buildings, under The Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) as one unit. Furthermore, Tribunal has also ordered Hiranandani Realtors to return 70% of the total corpus fund and all documents related to the township project to the allottees association.
Case: M/s. Allaince Projects vs M/s. Palm Flat Owners Welfare Association
The Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench, comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy (Chairperson) and R. Padmanabhan (Judicial Member), has held that if the sale agreement stipulates that the promoter will earn interest on the corpus fund, then the promoter is liable to pay interest on the corpus fund, regardless of whether they actually earned any interest from it.
TNREAT - Appeal Before Appellate Tribunal Without Depositing Corpus Fund Is Not Maintainable
Case – M/s. Bahri Estates Pvt. Ltd., rep. by its Authorised Signatory & another vs Anandam Villa Owners Welfare Society (AVOWS)
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (TNREAT) bench comprising of Justice M. Duraiswamy (Chairperson) and R. Padmanabhan (Judicial Member), has held that an appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal without depositing the Corpus Fund as stipulated under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is not maintainable.
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority
TN RERA Orders Builder To Compensate Homebuyer For Mental Agony Faced Due To Delayed Possession
Case - Melvin Victor De Poures Versus M/S Poomalai Housing Private Limited
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA) bench Comprising of TMT N. Uma Maheshwari (Adjudicating Officer) has directed the Builder to pay compensation for the mental agony and inconvenience faced by Homebuyers due to delays in delivering possession, despite fulfilling all payment requirements on time.
Case – V. Saravanan Versus M/s. Spring Field Shelters (P) Ltd.
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sunil Kumar (Member), directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer to purchase the two villas. Additionally, the Authority imposed a penalty on the builder for marketing, advertising, and selling the unregistered project to the homebuyer.
Case – D. Narayanasami Versus M/s. SAM Foundations & another
Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Sunil Kumar (Member), directed SAM Foundation, the builder, to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer for purchasing a flat in their project. Additionally, the Authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh for marketing, advertising, and selling the unregistered project to the homebuyer.
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority
Case: N Rajashekhar & others Vs Astrum Value Homes Private Limited
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA/Authority) bench, comprising Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson), Neelmani N Raju (Member), and GR Reddy (Member), rejected the homebuyers complaint of restraining the builder from constructing on the area reserved for common amenities.
Karnataka RERA Grants Second Extension To Varin Infra Projects To Complete Project
The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA) bench, comprising HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson) and Neelmani N Raju (Member), granted a 2-year extension to Varin Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd for its project Adarsh Tranqville for the second time, under Section 7(3) of the RERA 2016. In total, this is the fourth extension of the project, the other two extensions were granted by Karnataka RERA on the grounds of Covid-19 under Section 6 of RERA 2016.
Case: MN Anudeep and Madhura MS Nilayam Vs Suvilas Realities Private Ltd.
The Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA) bench, comprising of Justice Neelmani N Raju (Member), has directed the builder to fully refund the booking price of Rs. 1 Lakh paid by the homebuyer on the spot after the request of the sales executive to book two flats, without reading the terms of the document.
Karnataka RERA Grants Homebuyer Permission To Withdraw From Project Due To Delayed Possession
Case: Anupkumar Shetty VS M/S Ozone Realtors Pvt. Ltd.
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (KRERA/Authority) bench, comprising Justice Neelmani N Raju (Member), has granted the Homebuyer right to withdraw from the real estate project following several years of delayed possession. Subsequently, the Authority directed the builder to refund the entire amount paid by the homebuyer, along with interest.
Case – Sharath Kumar Mahajan Versus Mantri Technology Constellations Private Limited & others
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, Comprising of Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairman) has directed builder to refund the homebuyer's amount with interest after builder failed to deliver the possession of the flat on promised timeframe.
Case – Rahamatulla Dhalayat Versus Mantri Builders Private Limited
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson), has directed the Builder to refund the amount paid by the Homebuyer to purchase a flat after the Builder failed to hand over possession even after a lapse of more than six years and failed to pay Pre-EMI to the bank.
Case – Uma Maheshwari Versus Shree Krishna Developers & Promoters & Another
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson), has directed the Builder to refund the amount paid by the Homebuyer to purchase land after the Builder failed to provide it within the agreed timeline.
Case – Rahamatulla Dhalayat Versus Mantri Builders Private Limited
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson), has directed the Builder to refund the amount paid by the Homebuyer to purchase a flat after the Builder failed to hand over possession even after a lapse of more than six years and failed to pay Pre-EMI to the bank.
Case – Uma Maheshwari Versus Shree Krishna Developers & Promoters & Another
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice HC Kishore Chandra (Chairperson), has directed the Builder to refund the amount paid by the Homebuyer to purchase land after the Builder failed to provide it within the agreed timeline.
Case – K Vimalkumar Versus ND Developers Private Limited and others
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising GR Reddy (Member), has directed the builder to pay forty-eight lakh rupees to the homebuyer as interest for the delay in handing over possession of the flat. As per the agreement, the builder was supposed to hand over possession by March 2019.
Case – Devdas Pandurang Shetti & another Versus M/s Mantri Developers Pvt. Ltd. & others
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising GR Reddy (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer to purchase the flat with interest after the builder failed to deliver the alternate flat, which was offered to the homebuyer after failing to deliver the initially booked flat on time.
Builder Fails To Deliver Flat In Time, Karnataka RERA Orders Refund To Homebuyer
Case – Loknath Nayak & another Versus Supervision Towers Private Limited
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Neelmani N Raju (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer for a flat, as the builder failed to deliver possession as promised for the year 2021.
Case – Dabasish Gayen Versus GVG Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. and others
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising GR Reddy (Member), has directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyer for a flat, as the builder failed to start construction of the project even after two years from the date of entering into the agreement for sale with the homebuyer.
Case – Sudipta Majumder Versus M/S Gulam Mustafa Enterprises Pvt. Ltd
Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising GR Reddy (Member), has directed the builder to pay nine lakh rupees to the homebuyer as interest for the delay in handing over possession of the flat in the GM Global Techies Town Tower C Project.
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA)
UPRERA Orders Builders To Name Projects, Towers, And Blocks As Per Sanctioned Map
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has issued office order directing builders to name their housing projects, Towers, and blocks as per the sanctioned map. This directive from UPRERA came after authority observed that various builders were naming their projects differently from what was originally registered with RERA.
UP RERA Issues Directive To Include Co-Allottee's Name In Complaints
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has issued an office notice addressing a common issue found in pending complaints across various benches. The notice highlights the absence of co-allottees names in complaints filed by the primary complainant.
UP-RERA Introduces Digitally Signed QR-Coded Project Registration Certificate
The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has introduced digitally signed QR-coded project registration certificates and directed builders to prominently display these certificates featuring QR codes at both corporate and project site offices.
U.P. RERA Makes It Mandatory For Promoters To Prove Their Title of Project Land
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has issued office order directing the promoters to ensure that they have legal title over the land on which they are applying for registration of the project.
UP RERA Mandates Real Estate Agents To Undergo Compulsory Training And Certification
In a significant step towards improving professionalism within the Real Estate Sector, the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has issued an office order mandating compulsory Training and Certification Courses for real estate agents.
UPRERA Issues Guidelines Outlining The Do's And Don'ts For Promoters To Adhere To When Advertising Projects. The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has released guidelines in the form of do's and don'ts for promoters which they will have to mandatorily follow while advertising their projects. These guidelines aim to create widespread awareness among promoters, agents, and homebuyers.
UPRERA Issues New Standard Operating Procedure For Withdrawal Of Project Registration
Title: Letter 2809/UPRERA/ 2023-2024
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has released a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for withdrawal of project registration. The SOP has been released to meet the demands of those promoters who fail to continue with real estate projects due to reasons such as lack of demand and financial crises.
UPRERA Releases New Standard Operating Procedure For Registration Of Real Estate Agents
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has released a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Registration of Real Estate Agents. This SOP has been released in accordance with Section 9 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which stipulates provisions for the registration of real estate agents, and Section 10, which stipulates provisions related to the functions of real estate agents.
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority
The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) has recently issued an order to clarify its previous directive dated 26th June 2023 concerning Ansal API Ltd.'s Sushant Golf City High-Tech Township project in Lucknow. This order specifies that there are no restrictions on registering allocations for projects that obtained completion certificates before the implementation of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA).
UP RERA Issues Public Notice For Builders To Attend Online Hearing Of 28 Complaints
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA) has issued a public notice in newspapers, directing builders from various districts of the state to attend and present their case in the online hearing of 28 complaints scheduled on different dates in the upcoming month. UP RERA's public notice serves as a final reminder for builders who have repeatedly missed their scheduled hearings
UPRERA Expresses Displeasure Over Non-Registration Of Properties By Prayagraj Development Authority
Press Note UPRERA/24/May/2024
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA) Chairman Sanjay Bhoosreddy has expressed strong displeasure over the non-registration of properties belonging to nine allottees of the Alaknanda Project by the Prayagraj Development Authority, despite the UPRERA order and the issuance of a completion certificate (CC) in January 2024.
UP RERA Releases Model Format Of Offer Of Possession Letter To Protect Homebuyers Interest
Press Release / 8 June / 2024
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP-RERA) has issued a directive aimed at curbing the arbitrary practices of real estate promoters in issuing Offer of Possession letters. This move is intended to eliminate the confusion and disputes that arise between promoters and allottees over possession terms.
UP RERA Introduces Standard Format for Written Arguments
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA) has prepared a standard format for written arguments to ensure the speedy resolution of ongoing cases at its headquarters and regional offices. This format requires the complainant to provide a complete description of their property, the sale agreement, payments made to the promoter, their complaint, and the requested relief in writing before the RERA bench.
Case – Himanshu Sethi, Tripta Sethi and another with 8 Others Versus Mist Direct Sales Private Limited
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) bench, comprising T. Venkatesh (Member), directed the builder, Mist Direct Sales Private Limited (Bhasin Group), to deliver possession of nine commercial units and pay interest for delayed possession in the Festival City Phase III project, Noida.
Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA/Authority) bench, comprising of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has directed the builder to refund the advance money paid by the homebuyer after homebuyer decided not to purchase the flat due to financial reasons.
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA/Authority ) bench comprising of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has ordered the homebuyer to pay the remaining amount with interest to the builder for failing to adhere to the payment schedule.
Telangana RERA: Only The Aggrieved Party Can Approach RERA
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA or Authority) bench comprising of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member) rejected the complaint of a person who was neither an allottee, a real estate agent, nor a landowner, holding that only the aggrieved party can approach RERA under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Case: Dr. N. Saraswathi representing Ms. Thota Kiran Mayee, through SPA Versus Sri K. Ramesh
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA/Authority) bench, comprising of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has held that the mother filing a complaint through the Special Power of Attorney (SPA) representing the daughter, who is the homebuyer, will be considered as a Homebuyer and an Aggrieved Person as defined under Section 2(d), 2(zg)(i) read with Section 31(1) of the RERA, 2016.
Case: Sri Sharath Chandimal VS M/s Buildox Private Limited
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA ) bench comprising of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has restrained Buildox Private Limited from advertising and selling its proposed Hafeezpet, Hyderabad project until the final disposal of the complaint filed against Buildox for violating Section 3 and 4 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, pertaining to advertising an unregistered project.
Telangana RERA Orders Builder To Rectify Structural Defects Arising Out Of Real Estate Project
Case – Chandrashekar Laxmi Sudha & another Versus M/s Empire Meadows and others
The Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA) bench, consisting of Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has directed the builder to rectify the structural defects arising from the project following the transfer of possession to the homebuyers, as per section 14(3) of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Telangana RERA Penalizes Builder for Non-Registration of Project, Orders Completion of Construction
Case – Sri Madala Bharat Versus M/s Sree Sai Raghavendra Constructions & others
Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TSRERA/Authority) bench, comprising Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), has penalized the builder for non-registration of the project under Section 3 of the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act 2016. Additionally, the Authority has directed the builder and other respondents to complete construction within 90 days and deliver the flat to the Homebuyer.
Case – Sri Chowki Ramesh and another Versus M/s Parijatha Homes and Developments Pvt Ltd
While hearing the complaint of two homebuyers related to the same real estate project, Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member), directed the builder to refund the amount paid by the homebuyers to purchase the flat. Additionally, the Authority imposed a penalty on the builder for marketing, advertising, and selling the unregistered project to homebuyers.
Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority
Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA/Authority) bench consisting of Justice Balbir Singh (Adjudicating Officer) has held that the delay in handing over the possession would be counted from the date mentioned in the agreement for sale entered into by the builder and the homebuyer prior to its registration under RERA.
Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA/Authority) bench consisting of Justice Balbir Singh (Adjudicating Officer) has held that homebuyers can approach RERA for the adjudication of matter, even though the Agreement for Sale stipulates an Arbitration Clause. Accordingly, Punjab RERA directed the builder to compensate for the delayed possession.
Punjab RERA Orders Compensation For Homebuyers After Project Site Was Declared As Protected Monument
Case: Jaswinder Singh & another Vs Estate Officer, Patiala Urban Planning and Development Authority, Urban Estate-II, Patiala
Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA/Authority) bench consisting of Justice Balbir Singh (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to pay compensation on the amount paid by the homebuyers to book the project site in an auction after the project site was declared a Protected Monument by the Punjab Government under Section 4(3) of the Punjab Ancient and Historical Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1964.
The Punjab government has commenced the process of appointing a new Chairman for the Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) subsequent to the resignation of former Chairman Satya Gopal in February 2024.
The Punjab government has commenced the process of appointing a new Chairman for the Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) subsequent to the resignation of former Chairman Satya Gopal in February 2024.
Punjab RERA Orders Builder To Pay Interest To Homebuyer For Delayed Possession In The LAKE Project
Case – Ashok Kumar and another Versus M/s Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developments Pvt. Ltd.
Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench consisting of Malwinder Singh Jaggi (Member), has directed the builder to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delay in handing over possession of the flat in a construction linked plan real estate project.
Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority
The Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HPRERA) bench comprising of Justice Rajeev Verma, has granted the homebuyer a full refund of their investment by rejecting the builder's contention of deducting 10% of the flat's cost as a booking charge.
Case: Dr. Baljit Singh Sidhu and another VS Sh. Jagjit Singh Ahlawat and Suman Ahlawat
The Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HPRERA) bench comprising of Justice Dr. Srikant Badli and BC Badalia, has granted relief to a non-Himachali homebuyer under whose favor the builder was not executing a conveyance deed, as the homebuyer had not obtained necessary permission under Section 118 of the Himachal Pradesh Tenancy and Land Reforms Act 1972.
Case: Amit Rana Versus Ahlawat Developers and Promoters & others
The Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HPRERA) bench comprising of Justice Dr. Srikant Badli (Chairperson) and BC Badalia (Member), has held that a builder cannot demand full payment from the homebuyer if the Project's Occupancy Certificate has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not complete within the agreed time for delivery of possession.
Himachal RERA Penalizes Builder for Advertising and Selling Flat Without Registration
Case – Bhawak Prashar Versus Smt. Indu Walia
In a Suo motu matter, the Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Justice Srikant Baldi (Chairperson) and BC Badalia (Member), has penalized the builder with a 13-lakh penalty for advertising and selling the flat without registering it under Section 3 of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority
The Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RJRERA) consisting of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer) rejected the homebuyer's complaint for basement parking facility, holding that it was never part of the approved construction plan, while hearing the seven complaint matter against the builder.
Rajasthan RERA Imposes 50 Lakh Fine On Builder For Failure To Register Project Under RERA
Case: Suo Motu Versus Harish Jasuja & another
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising of Mrs. Veenu Gupta (Chairperson), has imposed a fine of Rs. 50 lakhs on the builders for failing to register the project under Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA).
Case – Vasudev Takwani & another Versus M/s Riddhi Siddhi Infra Projects Pvt.
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority), consisting of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to compensate the homebuyer for the delay in offering possession by rejecting the builder's contention that the delay was caused due to an Enforcement Directorate investigation.
Case – Dinesh Agrawal Versus Parsvnath Developers Limited
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench, comprising Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to compensate the complainant who purchased a shop in the builder's project for the delay in handing over possession, despite paying all consideration and associated charges.
Rajasthan RERA Orders Compensation For Homebuyer Who Booked Flat Under CM Jan Awas Yojna
Case – Mr. Ramawater Saini & another Versus M/S AKG Affordable Housing Private Limited
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench, comprising of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to compensate the homebuyer for the delay in offering possession. Additionally, the Authority ordered the builder to pay Rs. 80,000 for the mental agony caused due to the delay to the homebuyer who had booked the flat under the Chief Minister Jan Awas Yojna.
Case – Dinesh Agrawal Versus Parsvnath Developers Limited
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench, comprising Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to compensate the complainant who purchased a shop in the builder's project for the delay in handing over possession, despite paying all consideration and associated charges.
Rajasthan RERA Orders Compensation For Homebuyer Who Booked Flat Under CM Jan Awas Yojna
Case – Mr. Ramawater Saini & another Versus M/S AKG Affordable Housing Private Limited
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench, comprising of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer), has directed the builder to compensate the homebuyer for the delay in offering possession. Additionally, the Authority ordered the builder to pay Rs. 80,000 for the mental agony caused due to the delay to the homebuyer who had booked the flat under the Chief Minister Jan Awas Yojna.
Rajasthan RERA Refuses Refund To Homebuyer In Completed Project, Orders Interest For Delay Instead
Case – Ashish Yadav Versus Cosmos Infra Engineering India Pvt. Ltd
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench, comprising Veenu Gupta (Chairperson), refused to grant refund to homebuyer in a completed real estate project, citing potential adverse effects on the project. However, the Authority directed the builder to pay interest to the homebuyer for the delay instead.
No F1 (31) RJ/RERA/2019/ 687
Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) has directed builders/promoters to submit architectural drawings while applying for a Completion Certificate/Occupancy Certificate and to open three separate bank accounts. These directives are based on decisions made during the Authority's 18th meeting held on June 7th.
West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority
The West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (WBRERA) has issued an office order addressing the mandatory display of registration details and website addresses in advertisements and other promotional material of registered projects by builders. The order emphasizes the requirements stipulated under Section 11(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which mandates builders to prominently display the WBRERA Registration Number and website address in all project-related advertisements and prospectuses.
Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT or Tribunal)
While setting aside the order and penalty imposed by the Delhi Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA or Authority), the Delhi Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT or Tribunal) bench comprising of Justice Chander Shekhar (Chairperson), Lorren Bamniyal (Judicial Member), and Sheo Pratap Singh (Technical Member), has held that RERA, while exercising its authority against a promoter or any real estate agent through suo-motu proceedings, must inform the concerned party of the alleged violations by providing specific details in the notice.
Gujarat Real Estate Regulatory Authority
Gujrat RERA Establishes An Internal Mechanism For Amicable Settlement Of Complaints
Gujarat RERA has released guidelines aimed at expediting the resolution of complaints under Section 31 before the authority by establishing an internal mechanism for amicable settlement. Designated officers, including Mr. P. R. Patel, Mr. D. D. Rajput, and Mr. V. C. Barot, have been appointed as Mediators. Additionally, representatives from industry bodies may be called upon if necessary.
Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)
Odisha RERA To Provide The Details Of Past Real Estate Projects Of Promoters To Allottees
Order No.: 1704/ORERA
The Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has issued a directive under Section 37 of the RERA 2016, requiring promoters, builders, and developers to disclose details of their previous projects at the time of registering a new real estate project.
Assam Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
Assam REAT - RERA Does Not Have Retroactive Application To Already Completed Real Estate Projects
Case – Sri Shantanu Baruah Versus M/s Dona Builders Pvt. Ltd. & anr
The Assam Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal') bench, comprising Justice (Retd.) Manojit Bhuyan (Chairperson), has held that the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, cannot be applied retroactively to projects that were completed prior to the enactment of the Act. Accordingly, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the appellant regarding the project in question, which obtained an Occupancy Certificate on 07.05.2014.
Telangana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
Government Of Telangana Establishes Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
The Government of Telangana established the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT) seven years after the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, came into force on May 1, 2017. The Telangana Government appointed Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy (retd) as chairperson, Pradeep Kumar Reddy Palle as judicial member, and Chitra Ramchandran as technical and administrative member of the Telangana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal.
