The complaint was filed by Sneha Sachhanand Tejwani against developers Ankur Mayflower Associates and Sahaj Ankur Realtors regarding Flat No. 601 in the project Evergreen Woods, located at Andheri–Kurla Road, Mumbai.

Background of the Dispute

According to the complaint, the buyer received an allotment letter dated 18 February 2016 from the earlier developer for a 476 sq. ft. 1BHK flat with parking priced at ₹75 lakh, with possession promised by June 2018. She paid ₹31 lakh toward the flat — ₹1 lakh by cheque and ₹30 lakh in cash, acknowledged by receipt.

Construction allegedly stalled indefinitely. Despite repeated follow-ups with the earlier developer’s partner Sunil Chandulal Shah, no progress occurred. The buyer issued a legal notice in November 2020 seeking execution of the agreement for sale.

In February 2021, she discovered via a public notice published in Hindustan Times that the land had been conveyed and the project taken over by another entity connected with Vinca Realtors Private Limited. She objected through her lawyer, asserting her prior allotment rights.

New Developer’s Defence

The new promoter argued:

• It never received any money from the complainant.
• It was not a party to the allotment letter.
• The buyer’s name did not appear in the list of advances attached to the 2020 dissolution-cum-conveyance deed.
• Therefore, it had no liability.

The developer’s counsel Viraj Bansod also contended the complaint was time-barred and legally unsustainable.

Buyer’s Argument

The complainant, represented by Mahesh Kukreja, relied on rulings of the Supreme Court of India and Bombay High Court, arguing:

• She qualifies as an allottee under RERA.
• Possession delay gives her an unconditional statutory right to relief.
• Once a project is registered, the promoter must honor existing allotments.

What MahaRERA Held

The Authority rejected the new developer’s core defence and laid down key findings:

1. Registered promoter = full liability
Obligations arise from promoter status, not from whether the promoter personally received money.

2. Buyer rights survive project transfer
Inter-se disputes between developers cannot override statutory rights of allottees.

3. Non-disclosure cannot defeat buyer claims
Failure to list an allottee in takeover documents cannot prejudice that buyer.

4. Delay clearly attributable to developers
Possession promised in 2018 has still not been delivered.

Crucial Finding

The Authority ruled that both developers are jointly and severally liable, meaning the buyer can enforce relief against either of them.

It also noted that the earlier developer, through counsel, had admitted liability and promised settlement within 60 days — which never happened. Another partner named in records was Nimish Dalal.

Final Order

MahaRERA directed:

• Interest on ₹31 lakh at SBI MCLR + 2% from 1 July 2018 till possession.
• Execution and registration of the sale agreement within 30 days.
• Possession with Occupation Certificate after balance payment.
• ₹5,000 cost for late reply filing by new promoter.
• ₹20,000 litigation costs to buyer.

Why This Order Matters

The ruling reinforces a major legal principle increasingly applied in stalled or transferred projects:

A developer who takes over a project also takes over its liabilities.

The Authority warned that allowing promoters to deny responsibility based on internal agreements would defeat the very purpose of the RERA law, which is meant to protect homebuyers.

Also Read: MahaRERA Orders Full Refund with Interest to Homebuyer for Possession Delay

The post New Builder Said “We Didn’t Take Your Money.” Buyer Still Won: MahaRERA Orders Possession, Interest in Mumbai Project Dispute appeared first on Square Feat India.