In a judgment that will resonate with thousands of homebuyers facing stalled projects, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has ruled that allottees of the “Ten BKC” project in Bandra are entitled to refunds only of their principal investment, not the interest earlier granted by MahaRERA.
Crucially, the Tribunal also set aside an earlier order that had wrongly directed the buyers to approach the NCLT. It held that MahaRERA must enforce its own orders and has remanded the matter back to the Authority to facilitate refunds in line with the approved insolvency Resolution Plan.
Background: Stalled Project & Initial Relief
- Project: “Ten BKC” redevelopment in Bandra, Mumbai
- Promoter: Radius Estates & Developers Pvt. Ltd.
- Co-Promoter: MIG (Bandra) Realtors & Builders Pvt. Ltd.
- Buyers: Numerous, including several UK-based NRIs
Under a subvention scheme, flats were promised by November 30, 2019, but the project stalled. On April 30, 2021, MahaRERA allowed buyers to withdraw and ordered a refund of principal plus interest.
The same day, however, the developer was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) by the NCLT, which imposed a moratorium.
Conflict with the Resolution Plan
The Resolution Plan by M/s. Adani Realty, approved on January 9, 2023, offered refunds only of the principal amount and required buyers to produce NOCs from Indiabulls Housing Finance.
- MahaRERA Order (2021): Refund of principal + interest
- Resolution Plan (2023): Refund of principal only, conditional on NOC
When buyers couldn’t secure the NOCs, a MahaRERA Adjudicating Officer told them to approach the NCLT — a direction now struck down by the Tribunal.
Tribunal’s Key Findings
The Tribunal provided clarity on both substance and procedure:
| Issue | Tribunal’s Ruling |
|---|---|
| Which law prevails in conflict? | IBC overrides RERA |
| Effect of Resolution Plan | Binding on all stakeholders, including homebuyers |
| Refund entitlement | Limited to principal only; interest claims extinguished |
| Who enforces refunds? | MahaRERA must execute its own orders |
| Case outcome | Orders directing buyers to NCLT set aside; matter remanded to MahaRERA for execution in line with Resolution Plan |
Implications for Homebuyers
Positive Takeaways
- MahaRERA remains the forum: Buyers cannot be pushed to NCLT for execution.
- Principal refund is protected: Recovery of original investment is secured.
Cautionary Lessons
- IBC trumps RERA: A Resolution Plan can wipe out claims for interest and compensation.
- RERA orders can be diluted: A win at RERA may not hold if the developer enters insolvency.
- Resolution Plan is supreme: Once approved, it binds even dissenting buyers.
- Beware of subvention + NOC clauses: Such conditions can complicate recovery.
Conclusion
For the Ten BKC buyers, the Tribunal’s order is both a procedural win and a financial reality check. They no longer need to chase the NCLT — MahaRERA itself must handle the refunds. But the scope of recovery is limited: only the principal, no interest.
This judgment sends a strong message to all homebuyers: while RERA offers protection, its reach is curtailed once a developer enters bankruptcy. Insolvency law prevails, and homebuyers must align their expectations accordingly.
