In a significant ruling that strengthens homebuyer protections under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has held that delays in obtaining statutory approvals and regulatory clearances cannot be treated as force majeure. The Tribunal directed Rare Townships Private Limited to pay interest to a homebuyer from 1 January 2019 till actual possession of the flat.
The case relates to Flat No. 0707 in the “Rising City – North Sea Heights” project at Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai. The allottee, Mr. Nimish B. Desai, booked the flat under a subvention scheme. An Agreement for Sale was executed on 28 November 2015 for a total consideration of ₹2,20,42,158. Under the agreement, the promoter had undertaken to hand over possession on or before 31 December 2018. The allottee paid approximately ₹1.37 crore towards the consideration.
When possession was not delivered, the allottee filed a complaint before MahaRERA (Complaint No. CC006000000198190). On 24 November 2023, Member-1 of MahaRERA directed the promoter to hand over possession after obtaining the Occupancy Certificate “at the earliest” and to pay interest from 1 July 2019 (granting a six-month grace period from the contractual date).
Aggrieved by the later start date for interest and the linking of interest to the Occupancy Certificate, the allottee filed Appeal No. AT006000000235101 of 2024. The promoter filed a cross-appeal (Appeal No. AT06/00573 of 2025) seeking complete quashing of the MahaRERA order.
Before the Tribunal, the promoter contended that the possession date under Clause 2(XXVI) of the Agreement for Sale was 31 December 2018 or such extended date as may arise due to force majeure conditions. It invoked Clause 36 of the agreement and claimed that the project was delayed due to a stay order passed by the Bombay High Court in PIL No. 86 of 2014 relating to height clearances, subsequent restrictions by the Airport Authority of India, the introduction of Development Control and Promotion Regulations 2034, delays in environmental clearances, restrictions imposed by the National Green Tribunal on sand extraction, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The promoter also pointed out that the revised completion date reflected on the MahaRERA portal is 30 June 2026 and argued that the contractual obligation to hand over possession had therefore not yet arisen.
The Tribunal rejected these contentions. It held that the force majeure factors demonstrated by the promoter do not fall within the ambit of the explanation to Section 6 of the RERA Act, 2016, which defines force majeure to mean cases of war, flood, drought, cyclone, fire, earthquake, or any other calamities caused by nature affecting the regular development of a real estate project. The Tribunal observed that delays in obtaining statutory approvals and regulatory permissions or sanctions from competent authorities cannot be brought within the scope of force majeure contemplated under Section 6. Such delays, it held, constitute commercial and regulatory risks incidental to project development, for which the promoter alone is responsible. An allottee cannot be expected to anticipate such contingencies or bear the brunt of the failure on the part of the promoter to act professionally by reasonably assessing the agreed date of possession.
On the COVID-19 argument, the Tribunal noted that the contractual possession date was 31 December 2018, whereas the pandemic and nationwide lockdown commenced only in March 2020. Therefore, the delay had occurred much prior to the onset of COVID-19, and the pandemic could not be invoked as justification for failure to hand over possession within the agreed period.
Relying on the judgments of the Supreme Court in M/s. Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. and Imperia Structures Ltd., as well as the Bombay High Court decision in Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd., the Tribunal reiterated that Section 18 of RERA gives an allottee an unqualified right to interest for every month of delay once the promoter fails to hand over possession by the date specified in the agreement. The statutory liability is linked to the actual delivery of possession and not to the date of obtaining the full Occupancy Certificate. The Tribunal also held that the facility given to a promoter under Section 4(2)(l)(C) to revise the project completion date on the MahaRERA portal does not rewrite the possession clause in the Agreement for Sale.
Consequently, the Tribunal partly allowed the allottee’s appeal and dismissed the promoter’s cross-appeal. It modified the MahaRERA order and directed Rare Townships Private Limited to pay interest on the amounts paid by the allottee from 1 January 2019 till the actual date of possession, at the rate of State Bank of India’s highest Marginal Cost of Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2%. The interest is to be paid within 30 days of the order. In the event of failure to pay within the stipulated period, the promoter shall also pay further interest on the outstanding amount at the same rate from the date of the Tribunal’s order until realisation.
The judgment was reserved on 15 June 2026 and pronounced on 21 July 2026 by a bench comprising Chairperson S.S. Shinde and Member (A) Dr. Rajagopal Devara.
The ruling once again underscores that promoters cannot shift the burden of regulatory and approval-related delays onto homebuyers and that the contractual date of possession remains the starting point for calculating interest under Section 18 of RERA.
Also Read: MahaRERA Rejects Homebuyers’ Brokerage Refund Plea
