MahaRERA: Taking possession does not wipe out a homebuyer’s delay claim
A Pune homebuyer who accepted the keys to his flat and only then approached the regulator has been granted delay interest. In a final order dated 2 September 2026, Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority Member Ravindra Deshpande held that handing over possession later does not cancel the allottee’s statutory right under Section 18 of RERA.
The message for other buyers is direct: signing a possession letter is not the same as waving goodbye to compensation for the months you waited.
The promise on paper
Ankit Rawat booked Apartment No. 1106 in Building B-2 of Avon Vista at Village Mahalunge, Taluka Mulshi, Pune. The project is registered as MahaRERA No. P52100023133. The promoter before the Authority was Anand Hemant Naiknavare, authorised signatory and director of Naiknavare Profile Constructions Pvt. Ltd.
The registered Agreement for Sale is dated 26 March 2021. Carpet area: 94.31 sq. mtrs. Total consideration: ₹98.81 lakh. Clause 6 fixed possession by 30 December 2022.
That date is the backbone of this case. Everything else — COVID, environmental clearance, an NGT petition, and a later extension of the project’s MahaRERA registration — was tested against that one line in the agreement.
Then the project stalled
The builder’s written say set out a long chain of events.
A proposal to amend or expand the Environmental Clearance had been pending since February 2020. SEAC recommended it in January 2022. Around the same time, a third party who was neither an allottee nor linked to the promoter, Shashikant Vitthal Kamble, filed Original Application No. 07/2022 before the National Green Tribunal, Western Zone, alleging illegal construction.
NGT did not stay the work, but it appointed a Joint Committee. SEIAA deferred the expansion proposal. The promoter said RCC work on Buildings B-2, B-3 and A-3 stopped from 21 March 2022. The committee inspected the site on 26 March 2022; its report came only on 27 September 2022 — about 26 weeks later.
The promoters moved the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 7135 of 2022. NGT later recorded that there was no stay and allowed SEIAA to decide the amendment. SEIAA approved it on 9 January 2023. Construction resumed.
The original MahaRERA registration ran till 30 December 2022. Citing the pandemic and the NGT–EC episode, the Authority later extended registration to 29 June 2024.
The Occupancy Certificate for Rawat’s unit was obtained on 10 January 2024. A possession notice followed. He took possession on 9 April 2024. The complaint was filed on 8 May 2024 — a month after the keys.
What the buyer asked for
Rawat invoked Section 18(1)(a). He sought:
- interest for delay from 31 December 2022 until possession
- rent of ₹4.80 lakh (₹31,500 a month for 12 months and ₹34,000 a month for 3 months)
- ₹1 lakh for mental distress
- costs of the complaint
- a proper SUV-sized parking space, or the difference in value
On parking, he said dedicated SUV bay CP4-2S was promised, but the puzzle-parking plate given at possession was about 1770 mm wide against an SUV width of around 1800 mm. He alleged seven-plate puzzle parking had been squeezed into a five-plate space.
He also said a gas stove and chimney given by the promoter were described only as a “goodwill gesture,” not as compensation for delay, and that the same item went to every flat.
He relied on the Supreme Court in Newtech Promoters and Fortune Infrastructure, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal in Jyoti Narang and Kunal Kumbhat, and the principle that a wrongdoer cannot profit from his own wrong.
His core legal point: the contractual possession date and the MahaRERA registration validity date are not the same thing. An extension of registration, including after COVID circulars, does not rewrite the agreement.
What the builder argued
The promoter called the complaint an afterthought. It said Rawat had not uploaded a proper complaint copy at the outset, had suppressed material facts, and had accepted possession “satisfactorily and to his satisfaction” with no protest.
It pointed to Clause 6(vii) of the agreement, which allowed reasonable extension for events beyond the promoter’s control. Allottees, it said, were told about the NGT case through communications, a webinar, minutes dated 15 October 2022 and an email dated 12 July 2023, including a stand that no compensation would be payable for such unforeseen delay.
NGT’s final order of 22 March 2024, the builder added, found no infirmity or non-compliance against the promoter.
The Authority’s finding: delay is not in dispute
Deshpande framed one principal question: is the complainant entitled to interest under Section 18(1)?
The answer, in substance, was yes — but only for a defined window, and without the extra heads of rent and mental agony.
The order records that the agreement “specifically stipulated that possession of the subject premises was to be handed over on or before 30.12.2022.” OC came in January 2024. Possession was on 9 April 2024. “Thus, there is a clear delay beyond the contractual date of possession.”
On the builder’s explanation, the Authority was blunt:
“The Respondent has sought to explain the delay by referring to the environmental clearance proceedings, NGT proceedings and other circumstances. However, the fact remains that possession was not delivered by the date contractually agreed between the parties.”
And further:
“the factum of delay is not in dispute and stands admitted from the Respondent’s own submissions.”
Registration extension is not a new possession date
This is the paragraph homebuyers should read twice.
“The mere fact that the project registration was subsequently extended does not, by itself, alter the contractual obligation of the Promoter to hand over possession within the agreed period. The Complainant cannot be deprived of the statutory remedy merely because the Promoter relies upon subsequent events or extension of the project registration.”
Section 18, the order says, kicks in when the promoter fails to give possession “in accordance with the terms of the Agreement for Sale.” If the allottee does not withdraw, interest is payable “for every month of delay till the handing over of possession.”
The Authority relied on the Supreme Court in Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Uttar Pradesh.
Taking the keys is not a waiver
The builder had leaned hard on the fact that Rawat accepted possession and only then sued. The Authority shut that door.
“The liability to pay such interest arises from the statutory consequence of delayed possession and cannot be defeated merely because possession was subsequently accepted by the Complainant. The acceptance of possession does not amount to waiver of the accrued statutory entitlement for the period during which possession remained delayed.”
That is the human warning in this file. A possession letter can record that the flat was handed over to your satisfaction. It does not, by itself, erase the months you paid EMI or rent while the building was unfinished.
What he did not get
Separate compensation for mental agony was refused. The Authority quoted the Bombay High Court in Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India:
“The requirement to pay interest under Section 18 of the RERA is not a penalty since payment of interest is compensatory in nature in the light of the delay being suffered by the flat purchaser, who had paid for his flat but did not get the possession.”
Rent of ₹4.80 lakh was not awarded as a distinct head. The parking dispute, though argued in writing, does not appear in the operative directions. No separate penalty under other RERA provisions was imposed.
The operative order
The complaint was partly allowed.
- The respondent must pay delay interest under Section 18(1) at SBI’s highest MCLR plus 2% from 1 January 2023 till the date of Occupancy Certificate (stated in the operative part as 9 January 2024) on the actual amount paid towards consideration. GST, stamp duty, registration charges and other statutory charges are excluded.
- Costs of ₹20,000 to the complainant.
Interest was not stretched to the possession date of 9 April 2024. It stops at OC. That is a narrower window than the 464 days Rawat had counted till early April.
What this order means if you already have the keys
If your agreement date has passed, the promoter later got a registration extension, and you still took possession because you needed a roof — this order says the Section 18 clock does not automatically stop the day you collect the keys.
What still matters, on these facts:
- the registered agreement date, not the later MahaRERA validity date
- whether you are claiming interest while staying in the project, not a refund after withdrawal
- that interest is treated as compensation, so a second cheque for “mental harassment” is harder
- that rent is not automatically added on top
- that side disputes (parking size, free gadgets called “goodwill”) need to be proved and decided; they were not granted here
The complaint number is CC005000000350899. Hearing was on 30 September 2025. Final order: 2 September 2026.
Also Read: MahaRERA Orders Full Refund with Interest to Homebuyer for Possession Delay
