Browsing Tag

MahaRERA

435 posts
MahaRERA rejected a review filed after four years, highlighting why delay and weak legal grounds can defeat your case.

Unhappy With a MahaRERA Order? Avoid These Costly Mistakes or Your Review May Be Rejected

MahaRERA rejected a review filed after four years, highlighting why delay and weak legal grounds can defeat your case.
MahaRERA has allowed deregistration of Prithvi Sneh project but made it clear that the builder remains liable for all previous orders and cannot escape past liabilities.

RERA Deregistration Does Not Absolve Builder of Past Liabilities: MahaRERA

MahaRERA has allowed deregistration of Prithvi Sneh project but made it clear that the builder remains liable for all previous orders and cannot escape past liabilities.
In a sharp rebuke to one-sided builder clauses, the Appellate Tribunal has ordered Omkar group to refund nearly ₹1.15 crore with interest to an NRI allottee in the Omkar Meridia project, holding that making refund conditional on selling the flat to a new buyer is unconscionable and against RERA.

Delayed Possession Claim Fails After Accepting Flat – Key MahaRERA Ruling

In a notable ruling, MahaRERA rejected a homebuyer’s claim for delay interest after they took possession of the flat and filed the complaint 10 months later, citing inbuilt limitation under Section 18.
MahaRERA orders Shree Sanket Developers to execute conveyance deed forthwith and imposes ₹50,000 penalty for violating Sections 11 & 17.

MahaRERA Penalises Developers ₹50,000 for Failing to Execute Conveyance Deed

MahaRERA orders Shree Sanket Developers to execute conveyance deed forthwith and imposes ₹50,000 penalty for violating Sections 11 & 17.
MahaRERA rejected a review filed after four years, highlighting why delay and weak legal grounds can defeat your case.

Paid ₹1.5 Crore, Got No Flat: MahaRERA Rejects Buyer’s Claim Against New Developer

In a setback for homebuyers in redevelopment projects, MahaRERA has dismissed a complaint by a buyer who paid ₹1.5 crore to the original developer. The Authority ruled that the new developer cannot be held liable after the society lawfully terminated the old agreement, leaving the buyer to pursue remedies only against Zaveri Constructions.