The Tribunal dismissed Appeal No. AT006/000000053725/2022 filed by Nandkishore Harikrishan Altal against Marvel Landmarks Pvt. Ltd. and others, holding that the appeal had become infructuous after the allottee took possession of the flat during the pendency of proceedings.

Case background: From delayed possession to refund claim

The dispute relates to a luxury residential project “Marvel Ganga Sangaria” at Mohammadwadi, Pune.
The appellant had purchased Flat No. 301 for a total consideration of ₹3.00 crore under a registered Agreement for Sale dated 4 October 2011, with the promised possession date being 31 December 2013.

While a correction deed was executed in 2014 to rectify a typographical error in the building wing, possession was not handed over by the due date. Aggrieved by the delay, the buyer approached MahaRERA under Section 18, seeking:

• Withdrawal from the project
• Refund of the paid amount with interest and compensation

However, MahaRERA dismissed the complaint in November 2021 on the ground that the complaint was filed against the wrong project registration, as the flat fell in a different registered phase.

What changed during the appeal

While the appeal against MahaRERA’s order was pending before the Appellate Tribunal, a crucial development altered the legal landscape:

• The flat had been mortgaged to Phoenix ARC Pvt. Ltd.
• Due to loan default, Phoenix ARC took physical possession on 11 November 2021 under the SARFAESI Act
• The appellant later cleared all dues and re-took possession of the flat on 19 July 2023, supported by a possession letter placed on record

Despite having taken possession, the appellant argued that he was no longer interested in the flat and was willing to return it to the promoter in exchange for a full refund with interest.

Why the Tribunal said “no return after possession”

The Appellate Tribunal, comprising Justice S. S. Shinde (Chairperson) and Shrikant M. Deshpande (Member – Administrative), rejected this argument outright.

The Tribunal held that:

1. Section 18 of RERA permits refund only when the allottee chooses to withdraw due to failure to hand over possession.
   Once possession is taken, the right to withdraw comes to an end.
2. RERA does not contain any provision allowing an allottee to return a flat after taking possession and seek a refund of the principal amount.
3. Even though possession was initially taken by the lender under SARFAESI, it arose from the buyer’s own mortgage and default.
   When the appellant cleared the loan and took back possession, the law treated it as acceptance of possession by the allottee.
4. Having taken possession, the promoter’s primary contractual obligation stood substantially fulfilled, rendering the appeal for refund legally unsustainable.

On these facts, the Tribunal concluded that the appeal had lost its purpose and therefore dismissed it as infructuous.

What relief, if any, still survives

While shutting the door on refund, the Tribunal clarified that the buyer is not left remediless. If aggrieved by delayed possession, the allottee may still:

• Approach MahaRERA separately for interest on delayed possession
• Seek compensation, if legally justified

However, refund and project exit are no longer available remedies once possession is taken.

Why this ruling matters for homebuyers

The order reinforces a critical principle under RERA:
Possession is the legal point of no return.

RERA is designed to ensure timely delivery and accountability—not to function as a post-possession exit or buy-back mechanism. Change of mind, financial stress, or loss of investment appetite cannot be grounds for refund once possession is accepted.

For homebuyers, the message is clear:
Decisions on exit must be taken before possession—after that, RERA’s “no return policy” applies.

Also Read: Builder cancels booking, MahaRERA orders refund

The post RERA’s “No Return Policy”: Once You Take Possession, There’s No Going Back appeared first on Square Feat India.

Buying a home is often the biggest financial decision of one’s life. Yet, many homebuyers unknowingly make legal mistakes that can completely strip them of protection under real estate laws. A recent judgment of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT) is a stark reminder that emotions and trust cannot replace documentation and legal compliance.

The case highlights how buyers who paid money and waited for years were still not recognised as “allottees” under RERA, leaving them without relief.

Here are the critical lessons every homebuyer must learn from this judgment.

1. Never Rely on an Unregistered Agreement

In this case, the buyers relied on an unregistered agreement for sale from 1996.

The Tribunal held that:

• An unregistered agreement carries weak legal value
• Inconsistencies in signatures raised doubts about authenticity
• Without a valid agreement, allotment itself becomes questionable

Lesson for homebuyers:
Always ensure your Agreement for Sale is registered. An unregistered document can collapse your entire case—no matter how old or emotionally significant it is.

2. Receipts Are Not Enough—Bank Proof Is Mandatory

The buyers claimed they paid the entire consideration and produced receipts.

However:

• They failed to show bank statements proving money reached the society or developer
• One major payment was made to a third party, not the society
• The society denied receiving any money

The Tribunal ruled that receipts without banking proof do not establish payment.

Lesson for homebuyers:
Always pay only to the promoter’s official bank account and preserve:

• Bank statements
• Cheque details
• Transaction references

Without this, RERA protection may not apply.

3. Don’t Pay Money to Middlemen or Consultants

Part of the money was paid to Dalvi & Associates, who were not parties to the project.

The Tribunal completely rejected this as valid consideration payment.

Lesson for homebuyers:
Never pay money to:

• Consultants
• Agents
• “Project coordinators”
• Society office bearers personally

Only the promoter or registered entity can legally receive consideration.

4. Society Member vs Homebuyer: Know the Difference

The buyers argued they were members of the cooperative society.

This backfired.

The Tribunal held that:

• Disputes between society members and the society fall under the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act
• Such disputes cannot be decided by MahaRERA
• Jurisdiction lies with the Cooperative Court

Lesson for homebuyers:
If your dispute is about:

• Membership
• Society rights
• Internal allotment issues

RERA may not help you. Jurisdiction matters as much as merits.

5. Old Transactions Need Stronger Documentation

The transaction dated back nearly 25 years.

Over time:

• Bank records were missing
• Parties changed
• Developers completed the project and handed over flats to others

The Tribunal found the buyers unable to prove continuity of their claim.

Lesson for homebuyers:
For old projects or delayed developments:

• Keep documents digitised
• Periodically assert your rights legally
• Don’t wait decades to take action

6. RERA Protection Is Not Automatic

The biggest misconception exposed by this case is that anyone who paid money is an “allottee.”

The Tribunal clarified:

• Allottee status must be proved
• Documentation, payment trail, and jurisdiction decide protection
• Sympathy cannot override legal requirements

Lesson for homebuyers:
RERA protects prepared buyers, not careless ones.

Final Takeaway: Trust Documents, Not Promises

This judgment is a wake-up call for homebuyers who:

• Trust verbal assurances
• Skip registration
• Pay informally
• Delay legal action

In real estate, what you can prove matters more than what you believe.

Also Read: Renewal of Lease = New Lease, Attracts Stamp Duty Bombay High Court

The post Buying a House? Don’t Make These Costly Mistakes appeared first on Square Feat India.

Compliance with this provision will remain an important criterion in the proposed grading of projects.

All developers should set up a “Grievance Redressal Cell” for their respective projects to resolve the grievances of home buyers. MahaRERA has appealed to all the developers through a circular. There should be at least one Grievance Redressal Officer dedicated to this cell and his name, contact number should be prominently displayed at the project site. Moreover, MahaRERA has also suggested that it should be prominently available on the website of the developer.

Initially, the marketing system of the project is in contact with the customer while buying or registering a house. Many projects do not specify who to contact later if there are any complaints or problems. In that case, the customer does not know where to go. As a result he has to face difficulties in resolving his complaint.

This often leads to misunderstandings and complaints due to lack of officially reliable information. It can also cause problems in project completion.

For this, it has been pointed out by MahaRERA that if all the developers set up a dedicated grievance redressal cell for their respective projects, this issue can be kept under control as the complainant will get official and reliable information on time. Moreover, MahaRERA has also received such feedback from experts in this field from time to time.

Therefore, MahaRERA through a special circular has urged all developers to set up a dedicated customer grievance redressal cell. The details of how many complaints have been received and how many complaints have been resolved by these developers should also be posted on the website. This will help increase the credibility of the project.

MahaRERA has already announced the grading of projects registered with MahaRERA from January 23 on the basis of certain criteria. MahaRERA has announced that the establishment of a project-wise dedicated grievance redressal cell will also be an important criterion.

Pradeep Aggarwal, Founder & Chairman, Signature Global (India) Ltd. Said, “Every industry, including banking, insurance, and consumer durables, has a grievance redressal mechanism to address post-sale issues and problems faced by customers. It is crucial for real estate developers to adopt such a mechanism in order to enhance the trust of home buyers and provide them with a sense of security. We appreciate the initiative taken by MahaRERA to establish a system for grading real estate developers based on the presence of a grievance redressal wing. In fact, it should be considered by RERA authorities of all states.”

Also Read: MahaRERA fine Builders for printing ads without MahaRERA number

The post Developers to redress complaints of home buyers have to set up Grievance Redressal Cell: MahaRERA appeared first on Square Feat India.

As part of enabling the monitoring system of MahaRERA, MahaRERA has started reviewing the projects registered since 2017 after the establishment of MahaRERA. Because after registration of any housing project in MahaRERA, as per section 11 of RERA Act, the project promoter is required to update the information given at the time of registration on the website of MahaRERA every 3 months.

However, it was noticed that most of the projects have not recorded this information since registration. Therefore, Maharera has started sending show cause notices to all such projects on a project-wise basis. Out of a total 18,000 projects, such notices have been sent to 2,000 projects and notices will be sent to all within a month.

Notice is being sent to the registered e-mail address provided by these projects during registration. All these promoters have been given a period of 30 days from the date of notice to remedy the deficiencies. Even then, those who do not receive response, rectification of errors, promoters will be liable for penal action by MahaRERA. Also, the promoters will have to pay the fine from 30% of their amount.

According to the RERA Act, the promoter is required to keep 70 percent of the money received from customers by opening a separate account. When the money is withdrawn, at each stage of construction, a certificate from the project engineer, architect and chartered accountant on the percentage of project completion, quality, and unrealised cost must be submitted to the bank. A quarterly inventory of flats and plots sold in the project has to be posted on the website.

Most importantly, it is mandatory to audit the project account every six months and six months after the end of each year, it is mandatory to submit a Statutory Audit certifying that the amount withdrawn from this account has been withdrawn in proportion to the project completion and spent on the project itself.

All these promoters are required to submit information for a period of five years from 2017-18 to 2021-22. Assuming that there may be a break in updating this information due to the interim COVID crisis, 1 time concession has been given to provide 5 years of information in a single form at the end of every year. Which they are expected to do within a month. But for the year 2022-23, only quarterly form is required.

Also Read: MahaRERA tells developers to inform all Company details where they are associated

The post MahaRERA initiates scanning of all housing projects registered in 5 years appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

When one buys a home, the homebuyer buys his dream, it is not just a house that will accommodate him and his family but will decide how their future will be.

Similarly when a developer builds a home he’s doing it to carry out a business, which will help him and his family survive. Also he has to pay his staff, who survive on the money coming from the homebuyer.

There are many a times that a homebuyer knowingly, or unknowingly fails to pay the next instalment.

In this case, what is expected of a homebuyer to do, the homebuyer should pay the instalment within 15 days of the builder raising the claim.

If the homebuyer fails to make the payment within 15 days of such claim being raised by the builder, the builder is entitled to cancel the allotment.

On August 12, MahaRERA came up with a circular that has defined how the allotment letter or agreement for sale will look like.

In this under the clause 12 of the proforma uploaded by MahaRERA, it has mentioned the following.

“In the event the booking amount is collected in stages and if the allottee fails to pay the subsequent stage installment, the promoter shall serve upon the allottee a notice calling upon the
allotted to pay the subsequent stage installment within 15 (fifteen) days which if not complied, the promoter shall be entitled to cancel this allotment letter.”

The clause further reads, “On cancellation of the allotment letter the promoter shall be entitled to forfeit the amount paid by the allottee or such amount as mentioned in the Table enumerated in Clause 9 whichever is less.”

Details of table 9 is as follows:

Now the developer has legitimate reason to cancel the booking on account of failure from the homebuyer to make payment to him.

The post Failure of homebuyer to pay next installment in 15 days can lead to cancellation of allotment appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

A builder was fined Rs 1 lakh by MahaRERA, the fine was imposed for a violation of the RERA act by the builder.

Complainant Shaikh Arbaz Arif, approached MahaRERA against Shree Samarth Construction builders and developers.

It was the complaint of Shaikh that the builder had allotted him 8 flats through a development agreement. These apartments were to be given to the complainant in lieu of the development rights of the land which he was holding.

This building was to be completed in 30 months from the date of commencement certificated dated, April 18, 2015.

The complaint also claimed that the project wasn’t registered with MahaRERA and hence sought compensation, possession and also rectification of various defects in the building.

The builder submitted that they were located in the gram panchayat and it was with the consent of the land owner that they continued with the construction without registering under the RER act. The builder also claimed that due to COVID 19, non-availability of sand and other reasons he was not able to complete the project.

Section 3 o the RERA act clearly states that, no promoter shall advertise, market, book sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase in any manner any plot, apartment or building, as the case may be, in any real estate project or part of it in any planning area, without registering the real estate project with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority established under the Act.

Section 4 and 4 (2) (c) and (d) of the Act, which states, every promoter shall make an application to the authority for registration of the real estate project in such form, manner, within such time and accompanied by such fee as may be specified by the regulations made by the Authority. The section further states that an authenticated copy of the approvals and commencement certificate from the competent authority obtained in accordance with the laws as may be applicable for the real estate project mentioned in the application, and where the project is proposed to be developed in phases, an authenticated copy of the approvals and commencement certificate form the competent authority for each of such phases.

The section 4 (2) (d) states that the sanctioned plan, layout plan and specifications of the proposed project or the phase thereof, and the whole project as sanctioned by the competent authority.

Section 59 of RERA states that, if any promoter contravenes the provisions of section 3, he shall be liable to a penalty which may extend up to ten per cent of the estimated cost of the real estate project as determined by the Authority.

Mehta in his order stated that it is clear from the submissions made by the parties that the project is an on going project as the OC is not yet obtained by the developer for the said project and this falls within the ambit of the section 3 of the act.

He further observed that the project is an on-going project, the same needs to be registered within a period of 30 days of the builder obtaining the requisite approvals of the project. The builder shall not advertise, market, book or create third party rights by offer for sale, enter into agreement for sale any apartment in the project, without obtaining the MahaRERA registration number for the project.

Finally MahaRERA chairman Mehta noted in his order that the builder has accepted monies from the complainant without registering the project with MahaRERA, the builder is directed to pay MahaRERA a penalty of Rs 1 lakh for violation of section 3 of the RERA act.

Also Read: Of the 17k complaints in how many has MahaRERA passed an Order!

The post Builder fined Rs 1 lac for RERA Violation appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has revoked the registration of total 8 projects.

Of these 8 projects MahaRERA revoked the registration of 4 projects in the month of September.

Of these 4 projects, one project lost its registration of September 14, the other one’s registration was revoked by MahaRERA on September 24, whereas the remaining two were declared Ab Initio Void on September 28.

While we give your details of the 8 projects, one should know why registration is important.

According to RERA a developer before selling any flat within Maharashtra has to register their project with MahaRERA.

This is to bring transparency, and accountability on the part of the developer.

The developer during registration has to mention all details fo the projects he’s carrying out. This even included completion date.

If the developer fails to delivery the apartment on or before the date of completion MahaRERA has the powers to levy a fine along with interest.

The 8 projects are

1. Mithanagar Archana CHS LTD. of which promoter is Dhanashree Developers
2. DSK Sadaphuli of which promoter is DSKulkarni Company
3. DSK Sadaphuli of which promoter is DSK Worldman Projects LTD
4. Laaffaires Avenue Commercial and Laflor Residency Commercial of which promoter is SSV Realtors
5. Sai Developers and Builders of which promoter is Shirsagar Yadav
6. Ganeshwadi CHS LTD-SRA, of which promoter is Ashok Gupta
7. Rite Civis of which promoter is Yashodanand Developers
8. Hariom Vikla of which promoter is Mageshkumar Shah

These are the 8 projects which lost their registration. The last 4 that is from 5-8 lost their registration in the month of September 2021.

So if you are a homebuyer and have invested then please check whether you have invested in these projects.

Home buying a lifetime experience and people invest their lifetime savings in it.

However, there are umpteen examples where homebuyers have ended up suffering because of the developers.

The government came out with regulations that can help homebuyers and RERA is one such.

Projects without MahaRERA registration are not allowed to sell, advertise or market in the state and these 8 projects now fall in this category.

Also Read: MahaRERA Gifts one more extension to Developers

The post Hope You haven’t bought a Flat in these 8 Projects, MahaRERA has Revoked their Registration appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

MahaRERA came out with a circular that has given yet another extension to developers.

This extension of time is in regards to submission of Form 5 by developers.

The circular states that, Section 4 of the real estate regulatory act states that promoter which is builder shall get his accounts audited within six months after the end of every financial year by a chartered accountant in practice and shall produce a statement of accounts duly certified and signed by such chartered accountant.

The circular further reads, “Whereas in view of second wave of COVID-19 pandemic and consequent lockdowns, MahaRERA had issued an order granting an extension of a period of six months from April 15, 2021 to October 14, 2021 for all statutory compliances under section 11 of the act.”

Now in the exercise of the powers under section 37 read with section 34(a), 34(f) and 34(g) MahaRERA issued further directions with immediate effect.

MahaRERA has stated that for all registered projects that are required to submit form 5 for the financial year 2020-21 the deadline for submission of form 5, is being extended from September 30, 2021 to December 31, 2021.

What do Form 5?
Adv Sunil Kewalramani explains, “Form 5 is ‘Annual Report of Statement of Accounts’ of a Project given by the CA of the Developer as per Regulation 4 of Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (General) Regulations, 2017. This Form 5 the Developer has to submit every year to MahaRERA.”

On the circular Kewalramani says, “This much needed relief of extension of timelines was required; due to COVID-19 and also as there are technical glitches in the new income tax e-filing portals.”

The builder community is happy with this move too. Anand Gupta, chairman of RERA committee of Buillders Association of India termed the circular as just and fair decision by MahaRERA and said the builder community welcomes the move.

Also Read: This is how MahaRERA plans to deliver Justice fast

The post MahaRERA Gifts one more extension to Developers appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

The Maharashtra Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was enacted so as to establish the Real Estate Regulation Authority, and one of its objectives as being to establish an adjudicating mechanism for speedy dispute redressal.

Section 31 of the Act, enables any aggrieved person to file a complaint with MahaRERA, for any violation or contravention of the provisions of the Act or the rules and regulations.

Sub-section (2) of Section 38 of the Act states that MahaRERA shall be guided by the principles of natural justice and subject to the other provisions of the Act and the rules made thereunder, MahaRERA shall have to powers to regulate its own procedure.

Rule 6 and Rule 7 of the Maharashtra Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (Recovery of Interest, Penalty, Compensation, Fine payable, Forms of Complaint and appeal, etc.) Rules 2017, stipulates the procedure that MahaRERA and Adjudicating Officer should follow, for the purpose of deciding complaints and the manner of holding of inquiry in the complaints as filed.

According to a Circular dated 18.05.2021, the guidelines for functioning of MahaRERA Conciliation and Dispute Resolution Forum (Conciliation Bench) has been prescribed.

The circular said, ”In spite of the procedure for the purpose of deciding complaints and the manner of holding of enquiry in the complaints as filed have been detailed out under Rules 6 & 7 of the Rules by MahaRERA and
Adjudicating Officer as well as the guidelines for functioning of MahaRERA
Conciliation Bench, it is necessary to issue the following order in the matter of writing of the “roznama” and giving the “next date” in the complaints, so that there is no cause for any grievance from the respective parties appearing in the complaints.”

• Roznama in the complaints shall be dictated by the respective Bench of MahaRERA, the Adjudicating Officer and the Conciliation Bench in open court
• The next date of hearing of the complaint shall be recorded in the roznama.
• Only in complaints that are closed for final orders, the roznama may not record the next date

Adv Sunil Kewalramani, said, “This latest order by MahaRERA says that the court has to dictate roznama in open court and they have to give next date of hearing to the parties. The above steps they were not following mandatory previously.”

Also Read: Call this Number for any MahaRERA related queries

The post Next MahaRERA Date to be Announced in Open Court appeared first on Square Feat India.

By Varun Singh

Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) till date has received a total of 15,239 complaints.

These complaints are against both registered and unregistered real estate projects.

MahaRERA was formed to bring in transparency in the real estate sector.

It started taking complaints of homebuyers against builders who defaulted on possession, or didn’t fulfill the promises made to homebuyers.

The remedy to these solutions were offered by asking the developer to pay interest to the homebuyer or by imposing other penalties.

However, of all the 15,239 complaints received by the authority only 9,841 has been resolved.

MahaRERA, even started taking complaints against the unregistered projects. Unregistered projects are those where developers who were meant to register their projects with the authority but failed to do so.

The authority received a total of 14,437 complaints against registered projects. Of this orders were passed in 9,067 cases.

MahaRERA received a total of 802 complaints against unregistered real estate projects and orders were passed in 774 complaints.

The authority also started a conciliation forum. Under this 755 Conciliationrequests were received with consent from both parties.

In 676 cases the conciliation was completed while the rest are pending.

Also Read: MahaRERA to Prioritize Complaints of People with Life-threatening Illness

The post Of 15239 Real Estate Complaints only these many Resolved appeared first on Square Feat India.