In a significant development, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has granted a stay on an ex parte order previously issued by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) against Siddhitech Developers Pvt. Ltd.. The stay was issued on Miscellaneous Application No. 299 of 2025 (Stay) in Appeal No. AT12500049 of 2025.
The original MahaRERA order, dated November 28, 2024, had partly allowed a complaint filed by several allottees, directing Siddhitech Developers to execute and register an agreement for sale in their favor. Furthermore, the developer was ordered to pay interest for delayed possession of the flats, calculated from December 31, 2023, until the actual handover of possession along with the occupation certificate.
Siddhitech Developers sought the stay, primarily arguing that the impugned order was passed ex parte, without proper service of notice of the complaint, thereby depriving the developer of a fair hearing. The developer’s counsel emphasized that Section 38(2) of the RERA Act, 2016, mandates the Authority to adhere to principles of natural justice.
Adding to their defense, Siddhitech Developers contended there was no privity of contract between the parties, asserting that the offer to purchase the subject flat was never accepted by the non-applicants, and the alleged consideration was not received by the developer, implying the non-applicants were never true allottees.
However, the developer also highlighted that it had already deposited the requisite amount, as mandated by Section 43(5) of the RERA Act, 2016, with the Tribunal’s registry, arguing this fully protected the interests of the non-applicants.
The non-applicants, on the other hand, opposed the stay application, asserting it was misconceived and lacked merit. Their advocate stated that the applicant had chosen to remain absent for three consecutive hearing dates (October 8, 2024, October 15, 2024, and October 28, 2024), despite notices being sent to their registered email addresses via MahaRERA’s standard online procedures. They argued that the developer could have monitored the complaint’s progress through its online dashboard. Granting a stay, they contended, would cause them irreparable harm, potentially allowing the developer to dispose of the subject flat.
After considering the arguments, the Tribunal acknowledged that the impugned order was indeed passed ex parte. While noting that the “privity of contract” argument would be decided on the merits during the appeal hearing , the Tribunal found that the applicant’s deposit of the ordered amount fully secured the non-applicants’ interests.
Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the Miscellaneous Application, staying the effect, operation, and implementation of the impugned order until the final disposal of the appeal. Crucially, to safeguard the allottees, the Tribunal directed Siddhitech Developers not to create any third-party rights on the subject flat until the appeal is resolved. The Tribunal clarified that its observations in this stay order are prima-facie and apply only to the current application.
