Browsing Tag

Section 18 RERA

34 posts
Tribunal holds that accepting possession does not waive a homebuyer’s accrued right to interest under Section 18 of RERA unless expressly given up.

Taking Possession Doesn’t Kill Delay Interest Claim: MahaREAT Upholds Key RERA Right

Tribunal holds that accepting possession does not waive a homebuyer’s accrued right to interest under Section 18 of RERA unless expressly given up.
MahaRERA rejected a review filed after four years, highlighting why delay and weak legal grounds can defeat your case.

Builder Sells Flat, Later Says It Belongs to MHADA, Asks Homebuyer to Take Refund and Leave the Flat

MahaRERA rejected builder’s attempt to cancel a 2014 flat deal after claiming the unit was MHADA-reserved, and ordered possession.
MahaRERA has dismissed six review pleas by CCI Projects, holding that maternity leave of an employee is not sufficient cause for filing beyond the mandatory 45-day period.

MahaRERA: Employee’s Maternity Leave Can’t Justify 136-Day Delay by Builder

MahaRERA has dismissed six review pleas by CCI Projects, holding that maternity leave of an employee is not sufficient cause for filing beyond the mandatory 45-day period.
MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal rules that settlement on possession & payment does not waive homebuyer’s right to RERA delay interest unless explicitly recorded.

Delay in Approvals Not Force Majeure, Builder Told to Pay Interest to Homebuyer

Tribunal holds regulatory delays are not force majeure under RERA; Rare Townships directed to pay interest to homebuyer from 1 January 2019.
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.