No possession date and no RERA relief rules MahaRERA
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has dismissed a complaint from a home buyer against India Bull Real Estate Ltd for delayed possession ruling that since no possession date was given by the developer, RERA provisions do not come into play to provide any relief. Home buyer Pr
Published -
Dec 7, 2017 5:12 AM
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has dismissed a complaint from a home buyer against India Bull Real Estate Ltd for delayed possession ruling that since no possession date was given by the developer, RERA provisions do not come into play to provide any relief. Home buyer Prem Chand had booked flat 203 in SD-1one of the 16 eight- storeyed buildings in Indiabulls Savoli Golf City project located off Khalapur toll naka on the Mumbai-Pune Expressway. In his complaint to MahaRERA, he said he had paid the booking amount of Rs two lakh on September 26, 2012, and paid another tranche of Rs 2.5 lakh to complete 15 per cent of the flat cost as agreed, while the rest of the 80 per cent finance for the flat was to come in the form of a home loan from Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd. Since the developer had failed to give possession five years later, Prem Chand had sought refund of his investment with interest and compensation which works out to Rs 1.20 lakh. During the hearing, the developer’s say was also recorded, and an opportunity was given to the home buyer to present any official document that showed the agreed date of possession. However, Chand could not produce either an agreement with the developer or any other document which indicated the agreed date of possession. Indiabulls, however, has mentioned July 1, 2017 as the original date of possession and revised it to February 28, 2019 while registering the project with MahaRERA. “Section 18 of RERA Act comes into picture only when the promoter fails to complete or he is unable to give possession of the apartment in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale or duly completed by the date specified in the agreement. Here in this case, there is no document or any contention of the complaint showing the agreed date of possession…Therefore, in this circumstance, Section 18 is not applicable,” Kapadnis said in his order. In a separate case concerning Shree Siddhivinayak Platinum Park project in Undri, Pune, Kapadnis asked the developer Ranjeet Developers to refund Rs 15.87 lakh and Rs 15.73 lakh to two home buyers with 10.15 per cent interest from the date of their payments for delayed possession. Home buyers Atul Deshpande, and Ravindra Patankar had booked flats E-6 and E-01respectively in Shree Siddhinayak Platinum Park project phase I with the promise that they would be given possession before September 30, 2015, but the developer had failed to give possession. The developer contended that the project was delayed because the mandatory environmental clearance certificate was delayed. The developer also argued that the delay was beyond his control. Upholding the right of the home buyers to get a refund of their investment, adjudicating officer Kapadnis observed that from the facts of the case, it is clear that the developer had agreed to deliver possession on or before September 30, 2015, and had failed to do so. He said till May 2012, the developer had only Non Agricultural land order from the Assistant Director of Town planning but the developer went on to collect money from the home buyers.
Tags : News/Views