Agreement is not the only source to know date of possession held the RERA tribunal. Any other source/document in its absence can also be taken into consideration for deciphering date of possession and delay in possession, if any.
By Varun Singh
In an interesting order passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT), it used other sources to decipher the date of possession in the absence of an agreement.
Actually MahaRERA had ordered the builder, Sahyog Homes Limited of Oshiwara based project Verona to pay interest to the home buyer Arif Yakub Ansari, till actual possession, if builder fails to deliver possession by March 2020.
The builder then challenged the order in the tribunal stating that, there was no agreement of sale executed. Hence, the developer wanted MahaRERA to consider the date of possession mentioned on its web portal (July 2022).
The home buyer had alleged that he was assured date of possession as December 2017. However, as the developer delayed it, he approached MahaRERA seeking relief.
The developer sought refuge that on the web portal of MahaRERA he had revised the date of possession from December 2017 to July 2022.
The developer aggrieved with MahaRERA order had approached the tribunal.
The home buyer at the tribunal pointed out, that the delay in possession necessitating revision in date of possession to July 2022 is the result of changes effected in plans for undertaking construction up to 39 floors against the original plan of 30 floors for the own business benefit/interest of builder.
The buyer had booked the flat in 2009, though its number was allotted in 2013. The builder also tried to paint the home buyer as investor, which the tribunal didn’t accept.
The developer in the tribunal mentioned that he had never agreed the date of possession as December 2017 to the home buyer.
However, the home buyer challenged that this (December 2017) was mentioned on the MahaRERA web portal as original date of possession.
The developer told the tribunal, “The said date was put on the portal because builder had few registered agreements with other allottees having the said date of possession.”
Based on this the tribunal held that, “In this particular case admittedly no agreement specifying date of possession is there. But own declaration of builder on MahaRERA portal is sufficient to conclude that December 2017 was the committed date of possession.”
The tribunal further stated in its order, “This date of possession which Appellant (builder) claims to have been given to some other allottees in the same project is equally applicable and relevant for Respondent (homebuyer) also. From the facts submitted by parties, it is obvious that builder has failed to deliver possession by the said date.”
Finally the tribunal on July 27, 2020 confirmed the order originally passed by MahaRERA, while dismissing the appeal.
Also Read: Action against residents for occupying flats without OC
