Bombay high court confirmed an order of the RERA appellate tribunal directing a builder to first deposit 100% of the interest to be paid to buyers for delay in handing over flats at a project

Bombay high court tells builder to deposit 100% interest to be paid to flat buyers

Bombay high court confirmed an order of the RERA (Real Estate Regulation and Development Act) appellate tribunal directing a builder to first deposit 100% of the interest to be paid to buyers for delay in handing over flats at a project called Wintergreen in Borivali, as a pre-condition to hearing its appeal.

The HC, however, accepting an undertaking by the builder-CCI Projects Pvt Ltd-and gave it 5 months to deposit over Rs 19 crore before the Tribunal, of which Rs 5.5 crore is to be paid in 4 weeks.

The builder said it would in 4 weeks deposit Rs 33 lakh-30% of the Rs 1.1 crore ‘penalty’ to be paid to flat buyers. It will also deposit over Rs 10 lakh towards costs as directed. Failure to meet deadlines will result in dismissal of appeal pending before the tribunal, said Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Madhav Jamdar in their May 6 order.

Senior counsel Vineet Naik with counsel Mayur Khandeparkar for CCI Projects had challenged orders passed by the tribunal under the Rera Act for directing it to deposit 100% deposit “without recording any reasons.” Naik said section 43 (5) of the Act gives the tribunal discretion to seek deposit of at least 30% of the amount and “in many other matters the appellate tribunal has directed deposit of much lesser amount.”

The HC also heard counsel Rui Rodrigues for the Central government and counsel Vinodini Srinivasan with advocate Avinash Pawar for the flat buyers. Srinivasan pointed out that the Act provides for a minimum 30% deposit only of the ‘penalty’ imposed, not other amounts. She said thus pre-deposit of the entire amount before appeal is entertained, is mandatory.

Naik said the project is complete and flats handed over to purchasers. He said the MahaRERA order is only for compensation for delay caused and, therefore, complaints flat buyers should have been dismissed.

Naik also said there were 173 complaints filed by flat buyers, of which 69 are settled and 83 are pending for hearing before the Authority and 19 pending for conciliation. There were 112 appeals before the tribunal, of which 42 appeals are settled and in 53, order of pre-deposit was passed.

Naik then sought some time saying the builder is willing to make the deposit in five months and offered an undertaking to pay the interest deposit in five months and also offered not to create third party rights in four shops at Arcade, Rivali Park in Borivali, worth about Rs 12 crore.

The HC directed that in case of any settlements between builder and flat buyers within five months, the builder would be at liberty to seek modification of its order.

Section 43(5) of the Act envisages the filing of an appeal before the appellate tribunal against the order of an authority or the adjudicating officer by any person aggrieved and where the promoter intends to appeal against an order of authority or adjudicating officer against imposition of penalty, the promoter has to deposit at least 30 per cent of the penalty amount or such higher amount as may be directed by the appellate tribunal. Where the appeal is against any other order which involves the return of the amount to the allottee, the promoter is under obligation to deposit with the appellate tribunal the total amount to be paid to the allottee which includes interest and compensation imposed on him, if any, or with both, as the case may be, before the appeal is to be instituted.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/bombay-high-court-tells-builder-to-deposit-100-interest-to-be-paid-to-flat-buyers/articleshow/91776238.cms

The Gujarat Real Estate Authority imposed a fine for Rs 6 lakh on a real estate firm over its three projects in Gandhinagar not properly mentioning the RERA registration number and its website address.

Builder Fined ₹ 6 Lakh For Flouting RERA Rules

The Gujarat Real Estate Authority imposed a fine for ₹ 6 lakh on a real estate firm over its three projects in Gandhinagar not properly mentioning the RERA registration number on its website address.
As per the case details, the RERA took up suo motu case against the Kavyaratna group, the promoter of the development projects in Gandhinagar. It came to the notice of the RERA that the group has launched three projects namely Sanskruti, Shrusti and Nakshtra in Gandhinagar. When officials visited the site, the address of the official website was not mentioned on the advertisement hoardings at the spot and the registration number given by RERA was shown in very small fonts. This was deemed as the promoter violating RERA’s circular on the issue and also section 11(2) of RERA Act.

RERA bench headed by chairman Amarjit Singh issued a show-cause notice to the builder to explain why fine should not be imposed for violating RERA norms and asked him to remain present on May 10. Smit Patel, promoter of the group, appeared before the bench and assured that henceforth he will take care that such rules are complied with.

However, the RERA was not impressed with the assurance and decided to impose a fine. It noted that the highest possible 5% fine of the project cost can be imposed on the promoter in case of such violations. Sanskruti project is worth ₹ 167 crore, Shrusti ₹ 102 crore and Nakshtra worth ₹ 52 crore. “We are not going to impose the highest fine of 5% of the project cost, but a fine of ₹ 2 lakh for each project is imposed in the case,” the bench noted in its order.

The bench clarified that the promoter should deposit the amount of fine from his own pocket and not from the bank account of the project.

Meanwhile, RERA experts opined that builders should strictly follow the norms, and at the same time the authority should impose only a symbolic fine. “RERA norms have been introduced by the government to bring accountability and transparency in the real estate sector, and the sector has witnessed tremendous improvement after their introduction. Such a mistake can be a human error done inadvertently and the authority may impose a symbolic fine. Hefty fines needed only in case of serious breaches,” said Mahadev Birla, state president of the RERA Practitioners Welfare Association.

Source: https://www.ahmedabadmirror.com/suo-motu-case-against-kavyaratna-group/81832558.html

No Action To Recover EMI For Stuck Realty Projects

The surge in realty projects assuring umpteen homebuyer of the dream of having their own homes have failed to become reality. The aftermath of Real Estate Developer’s inability to deliver projects on time, have left many homebuyers with the additional burdens of paying EMI without having anything in hands.

The Delhi High Court recently in Ashish Tiwari v. Union Bank of India dated January 31, 2022, hearing a number of petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India of Homebuyers against Banks/ Housing Finance Companies (HFC) disbursing the loan amount through subvention schemes to the developers without even examining the fact as to whether the developers are in a position to complete the construction gave interim relief directing that banks/HFC shall not take any coercive action against the homebuyers to recover EMIs for pending projects where the builders were supposed to pay the EMIs till possession.

Ashish Tiwari v. Union Bank of India- Brief Facts

The Petitioners booked flats with the builders and took home loans under the subvention scheme by entering into a Tripartite Agreement with the builders and the banks. The subvention scheme provided for the banks to disburse the sanctioned amount directly to the accounts of the builders, who were then to pay EMIs on the sanctioned loan amount, until possession of the flats is handed over to the homebuyers. However, builders started defaulting in paying the EMIs to the banks as per the Tripartite Agreement, and subsequently the banks initiated action against the homebuyers to recover the EMIs instead.

Contention by Petitioners

The Petitioners raised the contention that the Banks/ HFCs have given funds to the builder in flagrant violation of the directions issued by the RBI and the NHB wherein the banks have been directed to exercise due caution while disbursing of housing loans sanctioned to individuals under subvention scheme. The Petitioners further submitted that the Respondent/ Banks/HFCs cannot claim payment towards the loan amount, which they in this present matter pre-maturely disbursed to the builders. The Petitioners also submitted that the banks, have in fact, acted in collusion with the builders, in releasing the loan amount even without examining whether the builder was in a position to complete the project or not. The Petitioners in their support placed reliance on the orders passed in Hridesh Kumar Pathak v. Bank of Maharashtra2 and Jayanta Kumar Mishra and Another v. Union of India3, wherein the Division Bench, by way of interim orders, restrained the banks from taking any coercive steps against the Petitioners or the homebuyers.

Contention by Respondents/ Banks/HFC

The Respondents submitted that once the Petitioners had knowingly signed a Tripartite Agreement, they cannot now shift the blame solely on the banks for any default on the part of the builders, and evade their liability to re-pay EMIs in respect of the loans issued in the favour of the Petitioners.

Contention On Behalf Of RBI

Further, the learned Senior Counsel, Mr. V. Giri appearing for the RBI, submitted that the banks are required to comply with the directions and guidelines issued by the RBI whereby the banks were directed to ensure that the disbursal of the loan amount shall be strictly linked with the stages of construction, and no upfront disbursement shall be made in case of under-construction projects.

Order

The Hon’ble Justice Rekha Palli noted relevant extracts of the RBI circular dated 01.07.2015, pertaining to the issue of subvention schemes or “innovative housing loan schemes” wherein it was observed that such housing loan products are likely to expose the banks as well as their home loan borrowers to additional risks e.g. in case of dispute between the individual borrowers and builders, default or delayed payment of EMIs by the builder during the agreed period on behalf of the borrower, non-completion of the project on time, etc. The Hon’ble Justice further noted circular dated 09.07.2019 issued by the NHB, wherein it was observed that the housing finance companies (HFC’s) shall desist from offering loan products involving servicing of the loan dues by builders on behalf of the borrowers and the disbursal of housing loans sanctioned to the individuals shall be closely linked to the stages of construction of the housing projects and disbursal shall not be made in case of incomplete or under-construction projects.

The Hon’ble Justice vide this interim order observed that despite the banks having disbursed the loan amounts when the construction was admittedly incomplete, the Petitioners were being asked to pay the amount that was initially required to be paid by the builders.

The Court further observed that the Petitioners who are individual homebuyers are also facing grave financial hardship on account of the devastating impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Therefore, the Petitioners have made out a prima facie case, balance of convenience also lies with the Petitioner and grave and irreparable loss would be caused to the homebuyers if they are forced to pay the EMIs in this challenging times due to the default of the builders. Thus, the Court vide this order granted an interim stay in favour of the homebuyers against the recovery of EMIs for pending projects where the builders were supposed to pay the EMIs till the possession.

Conclusion

This interim order in favour of the homebuyers, highlights the sorry state of affairs of the construction industry, where without any possession, innocent homebuyers are being forced by the banks/HFC’s to pay EMIs due to the default of the builders. Thus, the approach of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in interim order restraining the Banks/HFC’s from taking any coercive steps against the homebuyers is a big positive steps, and especially in such cases where the builders in collusions with the banks/ HFC’s have flagrantly violated the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India and the National Housing Bank.

Source: https://www.mondaq.com/india/real-estate/1191264/no-action-to-recover-emi-for-stuck-realty-projects

The RERA in the state has stepped in to help 600 odd buyers of a housing project left abandoned by the developer in sector 143 of Noida city

RERA steps in to complete an abandoned project in Noida Sector 143

The Real Estate Regulator Authority (Rera) in the state has stepped in to help 600-odd buyers of a housing project left abandoned by the developer in Noida Sector 143.

Launched in 2012, flats in Festival City were supposed to have been delivered by 2015. But the developer — M/s Mist Direct Sales Pvt Ltd — defaulted on the deadline and then stopped construction altogether. The buyers approached the UP-Rera, which sent notices to the developer. When it failed to respond, the regulatory authority blacklisted the developer and de-recognised the project. “Our next step was to take the consent of all the buyers and get the project completed. Two groups of buyers under Mist Avenue Buyers’ Association and Festival City Welfare Association showed interest in reviving the project,” said a Rera official.

The official quoted a provision from the Rera Act, which allows the regulatory authority to take the consent of the buyers and find another developer to complete a project.

But it’s a long way ahead for Rera in this case. The regulatory authority and the association of buyers are now faced with the challenge of collating the details of all the allottees who had booked a flat in the project and the total amount deposited by them. “The developer was not keen on sharing the information. Now that they have been blacklisted, we assume they might have gone underground,” the Rera official said.

The project has 1,600 units in total and Rera needs to have the consent of each and every one before going ahead with getting a developer to finish the flats. “Our efforts to get the details of the allottees from the Noida Authority proved futile. We have the consent of around 300 buyers, who are members of the two associations. But we need to track down the others and have their consent as well,” said Ravindra Sharma, president of the Mist Avenue Buyers’ Association.

Rera has now created a link on its official website where an allottee can upload documents to prove ownership of a flat. Once the data on the total number of buyers is collated, the Noida Authority will calculate the funds collected from the buyers and the estimated amount that can be raised from the unsold units. Rera will then hire a consultant to prepare a detailed project report. A developer will then be selected for the remaining project. “Only a DPR will give clarity on the money that will be required to complete the project and the amount that can be raised from the allottees and the sale of the remaining units. The new developer will have to complete the flats in a time-bound manner and Rera will oversee the project,” said Sharma.

Prashant Kanha, a Supreme Court lawyer who handles builder-buyer cases, said, “Section 8 of the Rera Act gives it powers that are seldom exercised. In this case, it is a novel exercise where the provisions are being used in the interest of the buyers.”

Spread across 25 acres off the Noida Expressway, Festival City was to be developed in three phases. “In the first phase, three towers of 35 storeys each were to be developed. But so far, only one tower has been developed. With the UP-Rera taking the initiative now, we are hopeful that the project will be completed in a timely manner,” Sharma said.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ghaziabad/rera-steps-in-to-complete-an-abandoned-project-in-sec-143/articleshow/91243595.cms

The order issued by MahaRERA member Vijay Satbir Singh on April 22 for a project in the state allowed the homebuyer to withdraw from that with a refund and interest over false representation in brochures by the developer under Section 12 of the Real Estate Regulatory Act (RERA) 2016.

MahaRERA permits buyer to exit project due to false information in brochure

False information in publicity brochures of new projects will cost developers dearly as cited in a recent order issued by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA).

The order issued by MahaRERA member Vijay Satbir Singh on April 22 for a project in the state allowed the homebuyer to withdraw from that with a refund and interest over false representation in brochures by the developer under Section 12 of the Real Estate Regulatory Act (RERA) 2016.

In this case, the booking of the project was done in April 2017. The brochure stated that the project would be completed in December 2019. The developers on registration with MahaRERA showed the project completion date as December 2021, instead of December 2019, and revised that till June 30, 2022, which was a misrepresentation, stated the order.

The order stated that the Marginal Cost Lending Rate (MCLR) of SBI plus 2% “is the interest prescribed by MahaRERA under the provision of the Act, along with the refund — which in effect would mean that the home buyer, who has paid Rs 55 lakh, would get additional Rs 15 lakh along with the refund”.

“This is a landmark judgement. It takes a serious note of the misrepresentation or fancy promises by the developers through their brochures. Under section 12 of the Act the buyer is entitled to claim refund of his money and compensation. The order is definitely in the interest of the home buyers,” MahaRERA member Vijay Satbir Singh said.

The homebuyer had lodged a complaint with the MahaRERA, seeking a refund along with interest in December last year under sections 18(1) and 12 of RERA.

The order issued by Singh noted that the complainant had put in the hard-earned money to book the flat and paid a substantial amount to the respondent. But even after accepting the amount from the complainants, the respondent failed to do their duty.

“The promoter of a MahaRERA-registered project left the complainant in the lurch after taking huge amounts from them and tormented them from 2017, the same year when RERA came into force” stated the order.

Moreover, the respondent went ahead and unilaterally terminated the booking for the non-payment of outstanding dues, despite failing to complete the project on the agreed date of handing over possession (December 2019) after accepting more than 20% of the amount. This was in violation of the provisions of MOFA, as well as Section 13 of RERA.

MahaRERA disposed of the matter by allowing the homebuyer to withdraw from the project, directing the builder to refund the entire accepted amount, along with interest at the rate prescribed by it (which is the marginal cost of funds based lending rate of the SBI plus 2% interest within a period of two months).

The current MCLR rate is 7% plus 2%, This meants that the interest levied is 9% per year for this order. “It would mean the total amount paid by the consumer, which is Rs 55 lakh plus 9% interest per year from the date of payment till the actual realisation of the said amount to the complainant. The allottee will get an additional Rs 15 lakh as interest,” a MahaRERA official said.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/maharera-permits-buyer-to-exit-project-due-to-false-info-in-brochure/articleshow/91111569.cms

Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Bihar, has started conciliation mechanism for resolving disputes between customers and promoters. Altogether 23 cases were taken up by the conciliation forum on the first day of the initiative. The real estate regulatory body has set up Bihar RERA Conciliation and Dispute Resolution Cell (BCDRC) to facilitate amicable conciliation of disputes between promoters and allottees through dispute settlement forum or cell.

Bihar: RERA introduces conciliation forum

Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Bihar, has started conciliation mechanism for resolving disputes between customers and promoters.

Altogether 23 cases were taken up by the conciliation forum on the first day of the initiative.

The real estate regulatory body has set up Bihar RERA Conciliation and Dispute Resolution Cell (BCDRC) to facilitate amicable conciliation of disputes between promoters and allottees through dispute settlement forum or cell.

An official said the step has been taken for amicable settlement of disputes with direct partcipation of the home buyers and the promoters. In fact, the process of conciliation is likely to be completed in two or three sittings. One conciliator each from buyers’ association, promoter or builder association along with former district judge and former adjudicating officer Ved Prakash as the chairman form the conciliation forum. The selection of candidates representing promoters’ interests has been done from among names provided by Bihar chapter of CREDAI.

Ravi Anand, Kamlesh Kumar and Satish Kumar would be part of the forum representing customers, while Narendra Kumar, Manikant and Sachin Chandra would represent promoters in the forum.

Bihar RERA has taken the assistance of Mumbai Grahak Panchayat for nominating conciliators representing the interest of home buyers. They are Ravi Anand, a journalist, Kamlesh Kumar, a banker and Satisah Kumar, a chartered accountant, with all being volunteers of Mumbai Grahak Panchayat.

Former chairman of Maharashtra RERA, Gautam Chatterjee, IAS (retired) who at present is mentor of Bihar RERA, is assisting in launching conciliation process here.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/rera-introduces-conciliation-forum/articleshow/90967753.cms

In February, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to examine whether the rules framed by various states under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA) are in conformity with the central legislation and subserve the interest of homebuyers.

States should not dilute RERA provisions: Union housing minister Puri

In February, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to examine whether the rules framed by various states under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA) are in conformity with the central legislation and subserve the interest of homebuyers.

Union minister for housing and urban affairs Hardeep Singh Puri on Tuesday asserted that there should be no dilution of the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, called as RERA, by states, and assured that the Centre will not bring the “whole template down” even if some states decide to dilute the norms.

He said the RERA is a widely accepted legislation and its success is anchored in the spirit of gradual but steady problem-solving.

The minister was speaking at a meeting of the Central Advisory Council (CAC), constituted under the RERA Act, 2016.

During the meeting, measures to ensure structural safety in high-rise buildings and prevent loss of life as well as property, besides considering a proposal to set up a high-level panel to address the issue of stalled projects, was discussed.

Regarding incidents of building collapses, Puri said homebuyers should have a sense of confidence that a building is structurally sound.

The responsibility has to be assumed by the builders themselves. If the builder has gone wrong, or he/she has not been able to check something, full recovery from that person is the minimum, as thousands of people get affected, he said.

Meanwhile, it was pointed out that some states have tweaked the provisions of RERA while framing rules under the Act by exempting the registration of ‘ongoing projects’.

In February, the Supreme Court directed the Centre to examine whether the rules framed by various states under the RERA are in conformity with the central legislation and subserve the interest of homebuyers.

“The fact of the matter is that you did not have a regulator and then you are bringing in the regulator, so everybody will try to stop it. When they found that we are resolute in our determination and they try to do something else, they tried to tweak it,” Puri said.

The minister said the Centre will place before the Supreme Court all the facts related to dilution of RERA Act by the state governments.

“I think we should place the fact squarely before the apex court that if all of us agree and some state do this (the dilution), we have enough persuasive power at our disposal to tell them this is not right. No dilution is a norm. Those who have diluted will have to justify why they have diluted. And we will not bring the whole template down just because you have diluted it,” Puri said.

In the meeting, it was also highlighted that all states/UTs have notified rules under RERA, except Nagaland which is in process to notify the rules.

As many as 31 states/UTs have set up Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Regular-25, Interim-6). States like Meghalaya, Sikkim, West Bengal and Union Territory of Ladakh are yet to establish the authority.

“The best thing about RERA is that it has come to be widely accepted in the country. And its success is anchored in the spirit of gradual but steady problem solving,” Puri said.

There are 30 members in the CAC panel which includes Niti Aayog CEO and secretaries of many ministries. President of homebuyers’ body Forum for Peoples’ Collective Efforts Abhay Upadhyay as well as presidents of realtors’ body CREDAI and Naredco are members of the council.

On the implementation of RERA Act by states, Upadhyay suggested that a committee should be formed, under the leadership of additional secretary, comprising all stakeholders to take up the issue with respective states. He said the suggestion of the FPCE (Forum for Peoples’ Collective Efforts) has been accepted.

Regarding tweaking of rules by states, Upadhyay suggested that necessary instructions should be given for compliance of the Supreme Court order in letter and spirit. The general rules for all states should also be reviewed along with ‘agreement for sales’ and placed before the apex court, he added.

FPCE has suggested that necessary directives should be issued to all states to ensure sufficient technical teams are provided to the regulatory authority to inspect every stage of construction at regular intervals to ensure structural safety and quality of construction.

Regarding constitution of committee of resolution of legacy stalled projects, Upadhyay said it was agreed to include FPCE as homebuyers’ representative in the proposed committee to look into this issue.

On the stalled projects, the CAC agenda highlighted that the Centre has established the Alternate Investment Fund (AIF)- Special Window for Affordable and Mid-Income Housing Fund (SWAMIH) investment fund of ₹25,000 crore to provide last mile funding for projects.

The fund is being provided to projects that are net-worth positive and registered under RERA, including those projects that have been declared as Non-Performing Assets (NPAs), or have pending proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).

As on February 14 this year, 249 deals aggregating to ₹23,778 crore have been approved, and this will benefit more than 1,46,946 homebuyers and unlock projects worth ₹66,163 crore.

“It is evident that this fund has proved to be very instrumental in completing the legacy stalled projects, and is fulfilling the dreams of homebuyers who invested their lifetime savings in these legacy stalled projects which were launched before enactment of RERA,” the agenda said.

Accordingly, the CAC might advise the Centre to constitute a committee under the chairmanship of NITI Aayog CEO to deliberate on all the issues related to these legacy stalled projects holistically.

“The committee may comprise representatives from the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, sectors’ experts (dealing with stalled projects and insolvency proceedings) and give its recommendations to the central government within two months from date of its constitution,” the agenda said.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/real-estate/states-should-not-dilute-rera-provisions-union-housing-minister-puri-101649844593293.html

The state government on Monday directed the state Inspector General of Registration and Stamps to initiate disciplinary action against 44 officers from various sub-registrar offices for registering documents in violation of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act (RERA) and the Maharashtra Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act.

44 officers face action for violation of RERA Act

The state government on Monday directed the state Inspector General of Registration and Stamps to initiate disciplinary action against 44 officers from various sub-registrar offices for registering documents in violation of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act (RERA) and the Maharashtra Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act. The order states that 44 officials have been found guilty of illegally registering about 10,561 documents.

The state had appointed a four-member squad for checking such documents from all sub-registrar offices in 2020 and a detailed report was submitted last year. The order was issued based on this report, state IGR Shravan Hardikar said on Monday.

The squads checked for the RERA number of the developer, whether the construction has got in-principle approval from the government and whether the land was parcelled before being sold. Complaints were made to Mantralaya alleging illegal registrations in connivance with officials.

Many complaints were related to the registrar’s office (Haveli No 3) in Magarpatta-Hadapsar. “For those who want to cancel the registration, the process would have to be initiated legally,” Hardikar said.

As on Monday, seven officials were suspended following this order while earlier, four officials were suspended to carry out a departmental inquiry, the order said. Orders of transfer were initiated by the state against nine officials while a departmental inquiry was initiated against another nine officials, and show-cause notices have been initiated against eight officials, the order said. Action will be initiated against seven officers by the joint district registrar officer from Pune city.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/44-officers-face-action-for-violation-of-rera-act/articleshow/90652130.cms

The Central Advisory Council (CAC) meeting will constitute a committee for the resolution of legacy stalled projects and the issue of some states tweaking the provisions of RERA, while framing rules under the Act by exempting the registration of 'ongoing projects.' "The provisions may include a physical inspection of projects during construction, Structural Audit by reputed institutes on regular intervals, declaration of Structural Safety by promoter before applying for completion or occupancy certificate, etc. Central Advisory Council may consider,” according to the agenda.

Structural safety of real estate projects, changes in RERA provisions to figure in upcoming CAC meeting

The Central Advisory Council (CAC) meeting scheduled for April 12 will discuss issues relating to the structural safety of real estate projects following an incident of partial roof collapse in Gurugram wherein two women were killed.

The meeting will also deliberate on constituting a committee for the resolution of legacy stalled projects and the issue of some states tweaking the provisions of RERA, while framing rules under the Act by exempting the registration of ‘ongoing projects.’

The CAC, set up by the government for effective implementation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), will hold its third meeting on April 12. The first two meetings of the CAC were held on May 14, 2018, and April 29, 2020.

The council, chaired by Housing and Urban Affairs Minister Hardeep Singh Puri, will consider measures like physical inspection of projects during construction and structural audit at regular intervals by reputed institutes.

“Recently, there have been reports of incidents related to structural safety in multistorey apartments. Though, RERA mandates the promoters to rectify the structural defects highlighted within a period of 5 years from the date of possession, some provisions related to structural safety may be deliberated to ensure further safety of high-rise buildings and to prevent loss of life and property.

“These provisions may include a physical inspection of projects during construction, Structural Audit by reputed institutes on regular intervals, declaration of Structural Safety by promoter before applying for completion or occupancy certificate, etc. Central Advisory Council may consider,” according to the agenda.

The committee may comprise representatives from the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, sector experts (dealing with stalled projects and insolvency proceedings) and give its recommendations to the central government within two months from the date of its constitution, the agenda said.

“Central government established the Alternative Investment Fund (AIF)- Special Window for Affordable and Mid-Income Housing Fund (SWAMIH) Investment Fund of Rs 25,000 crore to provide last mile funding for projects that are net-worth positive and registered under RERA, including those projects that have been declared as Non-Performing Assets (NPAs) or are pending proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC),” it said.

“As of February 14, 2022, 249 deals aggregating to ₹23,778 crore were approved which will benefit more than 1,46,946 homebuyers and unlock projects worth ₹66,163 crore,” it said.

It is evident that this fund has proved to be very instrumental in completing the legacy stalled projects and is fulfilling the dreams of homebuyers, who invested their life savings in these legacy stalled projects, which were launched before the enactment of RERA, it said.

The third meeting of the CAC will also discuss the issue of tweaking RERA provisions by some states. The CAC agenda noted that all states/UTs have notified rules under RERA except Nagaland, which is in the process to notify the rules.

As many as 31 states/UTs have set up Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Regular-25, Interim-06). States like Meghalaya, Sikkim, West Bengal, and UT of Ladakh are yet to establish authority.

In the agenda, it was pointed out that some states have tweaked the provisions of RERA while framing rules under the Act by exempting the registration of ‘ongoing projects. The matter was taken up by the housing ministry on several occasions and through various communications.

The CAC in its first meeting deliberated upon the issue of dilution by the states while framing rules under the Act. As decided in the meeting, the ministry has taken up the matter through various communications.

Homebuyers’ body Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE) president Abhay Upadhyay said in a statement that the agenda for the upcoming CAC meeting shows that the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs is serious and keen to address all major concerns not only in the implementation of RERA but also in providing resolution for incomplete legacy stalled projects started before RERA came into force.

“We have been raising the issue of dilution in RERA Rules by the states due to which many incomplete projects were left out of the ambit of RERA and also that RERA Authorities are unable to enforce their own orders due to which RERA orders became nothing more than a piece of paper.

“The recent incident of poor construction quality leading to loss of lives will also be part of the discussion,” Upadhyay said.

The proposal to form a committee under the Chairmanship of CEO, NITI Ayog is also welcome and shows that the government is keen to ensure the completion of remaining incomplete stalled legacy projects, he said.

“We have also come to know that the Ministry has accepted our suggestion to live stream the proceedings of the CAC meeting on social media platforms to ensure complete transparency,” Upadhyay added.

Source: https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/business/real-estate/structural-safety-of-real-estate-projects-changes-in-rera-provisions-to-figure-in-upcoming-cac-meeting-8297181.html

Following multiple appeals by the Karnataka Home Buyers Forum, the Karnataka Housing Department has finally taken up the case of a potential digital complaints redressal system as part of K-RERA.

After pleas, RERA may address plaints digitally

Following multiple appeals by the Karnataka Home Buyers Forum, the Karnataka Housing Department has finally taken up the case of a potential digital complaints redressal system as part of K-RERA. The home buyers had been struggling for years to get relief after being allegedly stiffed by promoters and builders.

They had appealed to various government authorities, including the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (K-RERA), on complaints and cases they had filed as well as suggestions on how to improve the current system to prevent years of waiting for complainants to get relief.

One of the suggestions was the implementation of a digital complaints redressal system, similar to the one recently imposed by Haryana RERA. If the request is implemented, Karnataka will become the second state to have such a system.

The home buyers believe that this will lead to more transparency and accountability, and will also help home buyers who do not reside in the state or Bengaluru. In this regard, the buyers had appealed to the Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs.

In a document shared with TNIE, the Housing department secretary has forwarded the request to the Karnataka Housing Department’s Secretary, who in turn asked K-RERA’s Secretary to look into the request. K-RERA Secretary Ibrahim Maigur could not be reached for comment regarding the potential implementation of the system.

Source: https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/bengaluru/2022/mar/26/after-pleas-rera-mayaddress-plaints-digitally-2434304.html