Browsing Tag

Real Estate Dispute

9 posts
Homebuyers win as Maharashtra Consumer Commission directs Fortune Belleza builders to deliver two flats or refund ₹35.12 lakh with 12% interest and ₹1 lakh compensation.

Homebuyers Win Big: Commission Orders Flats or 12% Refund + ₹1 Lakh for Mental Harassment

Homebuyers win as Maharashtra Consumer Commission directs Fortune Belleza builders to deliver two flats or refund ₹35.12 lakh with 12% interest and ₹1 lakh compensation.
MahaRERA orders new developer to hand over flat and pay interest despite claiming it never received payment, holding both builders jointly liable in Mumbai Evergreen Woods case.

MahaRERA Orders Partial Refund in Godrej City Panvel Case, Rejects Clause Challenge

“MahaRERA has allowed partial refund of booking amount in one case while rejecting demands to amend standard clauses in the Agreement for Sale, citing its own previous orders on non-negotiable terms.”
In a major relief to homebuyers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has directed Parorch Developers to refund over ₹2.25 crore with interest, holding that an allotment letter is a valid enforceable contract under RERA even in the absence of a registered Agreement for Sale. The Tribunal overturned MahaRERA’s dismissal order in the Trinity Towers, Powai case.

MahaRERA Orders Interest for Delayed Possession in Kalyan’s Vrundavan Project

MahaRERA directs Shree Vasturachana Developers to pay interest for delayed possession in Vrundavan project, Kalyan, as physical handover without OC ruled invalid. Buyer wins compensation under Section 18.
Court reiterates Section 79A redevelopment guidelines are directory, not mandatory, while upholding society redevelopment.

Homebuyer Paid to Director of Real Estate Firm, Director Died, Surviving Directors Claimed Ignorance — MahaRERA Steps In to Deliver Justice

In a significant win for homebuyers, MahaRERA and the Appellate Tribunal upheld a 2005 booking despite the handling director’s death and promoters’ denial of knowledge, directing execution of agreement for an equivalent flat or refund with interest — a reminder of RERA’s buyer protections even in legacy cases.
Bombay High Court dismisses developer’s challenge and holds that future additional FSI cannot be used to indefinitely delay deemed conveyance to housing societies.

Bombay High Court Clarifies ‘Built-Up Area Wall to Wall’ Equals Carpet Area in Real Estate Development Dispute

In a landmark ruling on November 25, 2025, the Bombay High Court clarified that the contractual term ‘built-up area wall to wall’ equates to carpet area, dismissing a developer’s challenge to an arbitral award in a Mumbai land development dispute. The decision highlights the need for precise language in real estate agreements to prevent ambiguities over usable space.