MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal Allows CCI Projects’ Delayed Appeal, Says Time Spent in Review Process Must Be Excluded

The MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal has condoned the delay by CCI Projects in appealing against an order awarding interest to homebuyers, holding that time spent on review and writ proceedings cannot be counted toward limitation.

Relief for Flat Buyers: Tribunal Blocks Builder’s Move to Avoid Refunds

In a landmark relief for homebuyers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has stayed a MahaRERA order that overturned refund reliefs, ruling that review powers cannot amend substantive orders. This precedent strengthens homebuyer protections against promoter tactics.

MahaRERA Tribunal Holds Ex-Partner as ‘Promoter’, Affirms Allottee’s Rights in RERA Battle

In a key ruling, the MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal has held a former partner in a real estate firm to be a ‘promoter’ under the RERA Act, rejecting his plea to waive the mandatory pre-deposit before appeal. The decision affirms the rights of an allottee in a delayed possession dispute and reinforces the legal safeguards built into RERA.

In a landmark decision: MahaRERA Tribunal Upholds RERA Act’s Retroactive Power

Based on the provided news article, here is an excerpt that captures the essence of the ruling: “In a significant legal victory for homebuyers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaRERA Tribunal) has delivered a detailed order affirming the retroactive power of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act). The ruling came in the appeals of two allottees from an incomplete project in Malad, solidifying the protection RERA offers to consumers even for agreements made before the law was enacted.

MahaRERA Must Allow In-Person Hearings Too, Rules Bombay High CourtVirtual-only model no longer acceptable; hybrid system mandatory within four weeks

In a major boost for homebuyers, the Bombay High Court has ordered MahaRERA to start hybrid hearings, giving litigants the choice to appear physically or virtually. The court criticized the Authority’s virtual-only model and directed urgent reforms in how real estate cases and execution matters are handled.