A builder wanted MHADA to pay the sale consideration along with interest and compensation. He approached MahaRERA for the same but couldn’t get any relief.
By Varun Singh
A builder approached MahaRERA against MHADA seeking directions that MHADA (Chief Officer, Aurangabad Housing and Area Development Board, MHADA, Chief Executive Officer MHADA) pays consideration along with interest and compensation.
The builder (Shree Hari Housing Resorts and Infra) was seeking relief in respect of the plot admeasuring 1,374.639 square meters in the project named Hari Jyoti Park- (Part 1) at Satara, Aurangabad.
It was the case of the builder that by virtue of a Government Resolution (GR) dated April 1, 2013, MHADA had agreed to purchase the 20% plot area admeasuring 1,374.639 square meters in the complainants’ project vide its letter dated July 12, 2017.
MHADA vide its letter dated December 4, 2019, had shown its willingness to purchase the plot as per the government resolution.
Accordingly, the builder claims to have taken, further necessary action for allotment of the plot area to MHADA.
Thereafter, various communications and meetings were held with MHADA, and by letter dated March 3, 2020, the builder requested MHADA to release the payment.
However, MHADA vide its letter dated Mach 5, 2020, has informed the complainant that there is no feasibility to take the said plot and therefore MHADA is not ready to purchase the said plot of the land.
Aggrieved by the said letter the complainant had filed this complaint.
The builder contended that if MHADA denies purchasing the said plot of land then it would have to go for a change in layout requiring revised permissions which may lead to a huge loss.
Hence, the present complaint is filed to seeking an amount of Rs 14,43,39,019.50 (Rs 14.43 crore) along with interest at the rate of 12% p.a from MHADA from the date of confirmation dated May 8, 2019, till the actual realisation of the said amount.
The builder further prayed for compensation of Rs. 10,00,000 (Rs 10 lakh) towards mental agony and legal expenses.
During the hearing, the complainant clarified that the complaint was filed against MHADA which is an allottee for violation of sections 18 and 19 of the RERA. There is no allotment letter issued by the complainant to MHADA nor any registered agreement for sale entered into between the builder and MHADA for sale of the said plot of land.
The builder by virtue of the Government Resolution dated November 18, 2013, tried to allot/sell the 20% plot area to the MHADA on certain terms and conditions. However, the allotment has not attained its finality and MHADA has refused to accept the said plot from the builder.
Dr. Vijay Satbir Singh, Member 1, MahaRERA noted in his order that since the said allotment has not been finally made, MHADA cannot be treated as an allottee, and hence the builder cannot seek any relief against MHADA under sections 18 and 19 of the RERA.
Sections 18 and 19 of the RERA provide for agreement for sale, which is not there in the present case.
The order further noted, “However, the complainant is always at liberty take further legal recourse against the MHADA before the appropriate forum”