The case revolves around New Sangeeta CHS Ltd in Ghatkopar (East), Mumbai. In 2011, the society entered into a development agreement with Pinkesh Jain of Valdariya Constructions for redeveloping their building. Three buyers — Bhupendra K. Shah, Nimit B. Shah, and Jigar B. Shah — booked flats in the proposed project “Valdariya Residency” and paid substantial amounts (₹50 lakh each) to the developer.

The developer executed Agreements for Sale in January 2017, promising possession by January 2018. However, the project never reached completion. In February 2018, the developer unilaterally terminated the Development Agreement with the society. The society accepted the termination, took back possession of the project, and later appointed a new developer to complete the work.

Despite this exit, the buyers continued to pursue the original developer for a refund. After filing complaints and entering into consent terms with the society in a City Civil Court suit, they approached MahaRERA in June 2021 seeking refund of their money along with interest from Pinkesh Jain (erstwhile developer).

MahaRERA’s Order (June 2023): The Authority directed the buyers to approach the City Civil Court for enforcement of the consent terms and granted liberty to approach MahaRERA again after final disposal of related proceedings.

The Appellate Tribunal’s Verdict (5th May 2026): The MahaREAT, comprising Member (Judicial) Shriram R. Jagtap and Member (Administrative) Dr. Rajagopal Devara, dismissed the buyers’ appeal and upheld MahaRERA’s order.

Key Reasoning by the Tribunal:

• Once the Development Agreement was terminated in February 2018 and accepted by the society, Pinkesh Jain ceased to be the “Promoter” of the project under RERA.
• The complaint was filed in June 2021 — more than three years after the developer had exited.
• Under Section 31 of the RERA Act, complaints can only be filed against a current Promoter, Allottee, or Real Estate Agent.
• Since the respondent was an “erstwhile promoter” on the date of filing the complaint, MahaRERA had no jurisdiction over him.

The Tribunal clarified that the buyers must now pursue recovery through the Civil Court. Notably, the buyers had already reached a settlement with the society to get the flats at current market rates, with an adjustment for the amount paid to the old developer.

Important Lesson for Homebuyers: This judgment highlights a critical risk in society redevelopment projects. Buyers should file RERA complaints while the original developer is still the registered promoter. Once the developer legally exits the project by terminating the Development Agreement, RERA protection against that developer largely ends.

Homebuyers are advised to thoroughly verify the status of the Development Agreement and the promoter’s registration before investing large sums in redevelopment projects.

Also Read: Housing Society Treated as Promoter in Redevelopment Dispute If It Shares..

The post Society Redevelopment Gone Wrong: Why RERA Refused to Help Flat Buyers appeared first on Square Feat India.