Tag: maharera

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

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

In the case of delayed possession of a house in Navi Mumbai, the MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal (Mumbai) upheld the MahaRERA order of payment of interest on the amount paid by the aggrieved homebuyer.

The order states,the builder is now required to pay a marginal cost of lending rate (MCLR) and two per cent interest under section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. The disputed property – on the 17th floor of Marathon NexE one of Sanvo Resorts Pvt Ltd– was bought by Neha Bagwe for Rs 38.77 lakh, excluding taxes and other charges, in 2012.

The agreement was signed in 2014 after the developer accepted Rs 10 lakh. The developer had promised possession in 2016, and Bagwe paid the entire amount by then. However, she and her family got possession only in January this year. Bagwe said she moved MahaRERA in 2018, seeking interest from the builder on the flat cost.

In 2019, the MahaRERA passed an order in her favour. However, the developer appealed in the Appellate Tribunal seeking that Bagwe’s plea be dismissed on grounds that the delay was caused due to factors beyond his control. Bagwe said the delay was stressful for the family as she had a home loan monthly instalment of Rs 20,000.

She said she had also taken an education loan for her daughter. The builder had contended in the Tribunal that the project land was declared as notified area in January 2013 by the state government.

Source: https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/navi-mumbai-over-delay-homebuyer-gets-interest-on-total-cost

The Conciliation Forum formed under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) to facilitate disputes between homebuyers and developers amicably to save cost and time of litigation has been proving beneficial as around 351 cases have been settled in Pune so far.

As a part of the regulatory body, the Conciliation Forum was formed in March 2018 to enable the disputed parties to connect and also appear before the expert conciliators to resolve their problems, clear doubts and mitigate misunderstandings.

The forum consists of representatives from CREDAI-Pune Metro, Mumbai Grahak Panchayat, a leading consumer body and other promoters’ associations.

Since its inception in 2018, the forum claimed that it has studied many matters of disputes and successfully resolved cases of aggrieved allottees or the promoters, who have opted for the conciliation mechanism, set up under MahaRERA.

The senior conciliators of the forum from CREDAI-Pune Metro include Hemant Naiknavare, former president, Amar Manjrekar, vice-president, Aditya Javdekar, vice-president, Arvind Jain, secretary, I P Inamdar, treasurer, Kishore Pate, former vice-president and Hemendra Shah, former managing committee member.

As per the forum’s process, any aggrieved party, customer or developer, can make a complaint online from the MahaRERA website after which a conciliation request is sent automatically to the other party involved. Once the other party accepts the request within seven days, the aggrieved party has to pay a requisite fee to MahaRERA, after which the case is referred to the appropriate conciliation bench, where the disputed parties seek to reach an amicable settlement with the assistance of the conciliator, who acts as a neutral third party, a member said.

“Conciliation Forum is a platform where the disputed parties get an opportunity to connect and also before the expert conciliators resolve disputes amicably. The parties get a chance to express their sides freely in front of the conciliation bench with a face to face interaction. A conciliator bench proposes the best possible process to deal with the dispute by making recommendations in the form of advice and suggestion and once the dispute is resolved, the conciliator issues a ‘settlement agreement’ which records the outcome of the dispute,” said CREDAI-Pune Metro President, Anil Pharande.

In certain cases which may include stalled, litigated or mortgaged projects, where the interest of a large number of allottees is affected, the forum, by putting extra time and efforts, has invited all the concerning parties such as financial institutes, land owners or any third party to attend the proceedings to resolve the issue amicably, he said.

In 2020, the forum took up the most complicated case of a stalled project in Pune wherein a huge relief was provided to 520 allottees after the settlement.

Similarly, the forum has taken up cases, including disagreements due to delay in possession or a claim where one flat was sold to multiple buyers, resulting in court litigation. The conciliators have handled the cases of defence and police department personnel as well, Pharande said.

Source: https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/pune/mahareras-conciliation-forum-settles-351-disputes-between-homebuyers-developers-7717446/

While the number of pending cases before MahaRERA is piling up with every passing day with more than 5,404 cases, the delay in getting hearing dates has not only irked the litigants but also the professionals practising at MahaRERA, as their demand to fill vacancies and increase the benches in MahaRERA has fallen into deaf ears. Legal brains say, if this continues, the purpose of setting up RERA to provide speedy disposal of complaints within 60 days of filing complaints is defeated.

Moreover, even with such a huge voluminous pendency of cases before MahaRERA, only two benches are functional as on date, increasing the workload on the system.

mid-day had, in its article titled ‘Wait for MahaRERA hearing dates keep getting longer’ on December 29, highlighted the concern of thousands of litigants about their plight regarding the long wait.

Speaking to mid-day, CA Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association (MahaSEWA), said, “Considering the pending complaints, the first date of the hearing is received after nine months to one year. In the first hearing, the parties are asked if they want to explore amicable settlement through a conciliation forum. If parties do not opt for regular hearings, the date for hearing comes after six to nine months. The subsequent dates are also given after nine months. Thus, the very purpose of setting up RERA to provide speedy disposal of complaints within 60 days is defeated.”

Prabhu added, “Complaints against registered projects filed till date (since formation of MahaRERA in mid-2017) is 15,593, and 10,189 orders have been passed so far. Pending complaints stand at 5,404. Complaints filed against unregistered projects are 839 of which 784 are disposed of, thus the number of pending complaints against unregistered projects is 55. Pendency is increasing with each day. However, with the vast leap in hearings from six months to nine months, instead of the mandated 60 days as per RERA act, pending complaints may go up to 10,000 in the next six months, which is worrisome. The need of the hour is to immediately appoint three additional benches and additional manpower for clearing these cases.”

Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who practises at MahaRERA, said, “Litigants who filed cases about a year ago are now being given dates from May to August 2022 in some of the cases handled by me, which may be the situation with other advocates as well. As such, additional members are required to be filled in to expedite the mechanism for complaint disposal ideally within 2 months from date of filing the complaint. Moreover, MahaRERA charges a fee of R5,000 per case towards filing charges, whereas other states charge a mere Rs 1,000.”

“The RERA authority was among the early few quasi judicial authorities to adapt to online hearings post the onset of the pandemic. However, the pandemic and other factors have resulted in increased defaults in the real estate industry, leading to breaches of agreements and non-delivery of the terms of sale deeds. There would, therefore, be an enhanced load on RERA. Thus, there would be an urgent need to increase the number of benches to cope with the increased load of matters” said Floyd Gracias, Supreme Court counsel.

Anil D’Souza, secretary, MahaRERA Bar Association, said, “Like all new ventures, MahaRERA is growing and will continue to grow. Hence, it needs more benches for adjudication. Since every second day, we see a MahaRERA order in the newsprint, more and more cases are now getting registered under the authority. At the same time, there is a huge stream of existing ongoing cases at various stages in the litigation process.”

“With the growing number of new cases and also the ongoing pending matters, it is imperative that there are more benches for adjudication that can reach out and address the hopefuls. Hence, a concerted effort to holistically address every stage, from court hearings to the final execution of the MahaRERA order is the need of the hour,” said D’Souza.

According to Prabhu, there are a few ways to move forward. First, MahaRERA and the state government have to increase the number of members/ benches in MahaRERA who can handle the complaints and assist in clearance of pendency. Second, the Supreme Court, in Newtech Promoters and Developers vs UP state and others, upheld the powers of RERA under section 81 of RERA to delegate its powers of complaints redressal to its members or any other person. Thus, RERA may appoint additional retired civil court judges or retired IAS officers to hear the complaints. Third, timely disposal of complaints is most important as the allottees have invested their life savings and are also paying EMI on housing loans. Any delay in deciding the complaints indirectly put the allottees to greater disadvantages etc.

Advocate Vinod Sampat, founder-president of Cooperative Societies Residents Users and Welfare Association, said, “The law stipulates that as far as possible RERA should pronounce the verdict within 90 days. This implies that a hearing should take place, all the parties should be heard and the matter must be normally disposed of within 90 days.”

He added, “As anticipated by many professionals practising in RERA, it is an open secret that dates are given after more than 90 days. The reason for the same is more work pressure and less helping hands due to staff crunch. COVID-19 lockdown also contributed to increased pendency of cases. During the first hearing, officials request the parties to go for conciliation of the matter and get the matter amicably resolved. I fail to understand why one should wait for a long time to give a date. Right now, a circular should be issued that all new matters should first go for conciliation and an attempt should be made by eminent and selfless bodies like Consumer Protection Division to get the matter resolved amicably. Presuming one is not successful with that, the matter would go on.”

He added, “If one looks at the number of cases being filed and the number of the officers attending the matters, we can clearly see that RERA benches are insufficient to cope up with the said work load. This will result in pendency of matters for years together. This requires it to be resolved in the most efficient manner.”

When asked what could be the solution, he said, “The solution is framing broad guidelines and issuing circulars. If the parties are well aware that this is the intention of RERA and if it is spelt out through circulars then people would be reluctant to delay the matter. We all know that builders use all possible tricks to delay the matter as the financial resources of the flat purchasers are limited. Moreover, the builder has got nothing to lose. These days, the nine per cent interest that may be awarded by RERA is peanuts. The need of the day is that RERA criminally prosecute defaulting builders. Unfortunately, the builders’ lobby is not taking RERA orders seriously. We all know that even the order once passed is difficult to implement due to bureaucratic constraints.”

Source: https://www.mid-day.com/mumbai/mumbai-news/article/pendency-with-maharera-will-go-up-if-additional-benches-not-appointed-23207216

The Maharashtra government has appointed a retired judge and a retired IAS officer as full time members of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT) set up under Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act.

Retired judge SR Jagtap has been appointed as Member, Judicial, and retired IAS officer K Shivaji has been appointed as Member, Technical/Administrative to fill vacancies, the government order issued on Tuesday said.

Jagtap has served as the designated judge of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and as a special judge in Khed-Rajgurunagar near Pune district. K Shivaji is a 1986-batch Maharashtra cadre officer who served with the Asian Development Bank before his appointment in August 2020 as Secretary Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances, and Pensions with additional charge as Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation.

The two members will join the Tribunal presently headed by former High Court judge Justice (retd) Indira Jain. Set up on October 24, 2019, the three-member tribunal had retired IAS officer SS Sandhu serving as Member, Administrative, and retired judge Sumant Kolhe as Member, Judicial.

After Kolhe completed his term, only one bench consisting of the other two members was functioning. The tribunal adjudicates on the appeals filed against the orders passed by the housing regulator Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA).

Source: https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-two-new-members-appointed-on-rera-tribunal

As many as 3,371 residential projects across the state have been declared “lapsed” between 2017 and 2021 because the builders were unable to complete them in the deadline they had set while registering their projects with the MahaRera. Of these, 453 projects are in Greater Mumbai, according to MahaRera’s list of “expired” projects.

“The validity of MahaRera registration for these projects has expired. The promoter shall not advertise, market, book, sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase in any manner any plot, apartment or building, as the case may be,” the regulatory authority said.

‘Funding is the biggest reason why builders’ projects lapse in state’

Builders must in such a case apply for an extension. Vasant Prabhu, secretary, Maha-Rera, said that these builders are granted a year’s extension by the housing authority. “But if they are still unable to complete the project after the one-year extension, such builders will have to seek the consent of at least 51% of the people who have booked apartments in their projects. If these flat buyers agree to a further extension, MahaRera will not object,” he said.

“Lapse of project can be avoided if the developer updates the project details mandated by MaharRera on its portal and obtains extension of project if required at a proper time,” Niranjan Hiranandani, CMD, Hiranandani Communities, and president of the builder body Naredco National, said.

Lapsed projects are not blacklisted projects, said developer and vice-president of Naredco West, Hitesh Thakkar. “It’s the timeline of the project, which is lapsed, which can be revived with consent of buyers. Developers must maintain transparency and good relations with their buyers,” Thakkar said.

Anuj Puri, chairman of ANAROCK Group, said Rera registration numbers of various projects in the state have lapsed on account of several factors, but funding is by far the biggest reason. “Rera was implemented in 2017, and a year later the IL&FS crisis held real estate hostage, particularly the residential segment. NBFCs had been a major source of funding for the real estate industry since banks were reluctant owing to rising NPAs. Funding by the NBFCs slowed down significantly with the IL&FS crisis. Private equity funding into the sector also slowed down to a trickle back then,” he said.

Puri said Grade B and C developers were the most impacted as lending to them was minimal. “It is not all doom and gloom, however. Government-backed funds are identifying some projects that are near completion to bring them to completion with last-mile funding, and some of the larger developers are taking over and reviving some other projects,” he said.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/3400-housing-projects-in-maharashtra-have-time-lapsed-rera/articleshow/85964532.cms

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRera) has directed builders to henceforth inform flat purchasers to what extent they have received construction permissions.

Currently, builders only declare that they have received the “commencement certificate” or the CC for the building without specifying anything further.

For example, the civic authority issues only stage-by-stage permission to the developer. The CC can only be restricted for plinth level or for only the first five floors of a skyscraper.

“The flat buyer is under the impression that the CC is for the entire building. This may not be so in most projects,” said a RERA source.

On Monday, RERA chief Ajoy Mehta’s office issued a circular, stating builders must now specify the details of the CC they have received.

“It is observed that layout approvals although obtained for the entire project, many a times other approvals are obtained in stages, including the commencement certificate up to a plinth/zero FSI/or commencement certificate up to a particular floor level. Flat buyers are unaware of the stage wise approvals. Therefore, it has decided to prescribe a declaration by the promoter (builder) to certify the exact stage of the commencement certificate, so that flat buyers will be aware of the same,’’ said the circular.

Builders will now have to file a declaration form and upload it along with the CC while registering the project.

In another recent order, RERA asked builders to give more clarity to buyers about flat transactions. “To avoid transactions of flats/pIots, it is necessary to provide the information as soon as sale is concluded or booking is made,” it said.

Mehta had earlier also ordered builders to meticulously submit the list of all their flat buyers along with their signatures in a proper format when seeking various permissions. Earlier, they would get away with sketchy details or shoddy paperwork when they registered their projects.

The builder will require the consent of at least 51% of the allottees if he wants extension of the completion date of the project. The consent will now be required with their names, flat numbers and signatures.

The circular has also specified that in case developers want to change the floor plan, design or make any major alterations in the sanctioned plans, they will require the consent of two-third of the people who have booked flats in the project.

Each of them will have to sign with their names and flat numbers on the promoter’s letterhead. The consent application will clearly mention the earlier building plans and the new alterations sought by the developer.

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/mumbai-maharera-tells-builders-to-give-flat-buyers-permission-details/articleshow/83347765.cms

The real estate sector has faced numerous challenges and RERA has been one of the resorts that brought in significant improvements in the real estate sector. Now, to dilute the impact of the COVID pandemic on the sector, can RERA bring in more efficiency and transparency? Throwing light on this, Rohitashwa Poddar, MD, Poddar Housing and Development Ltd., addressed the National Housing Summit.

He said, ”Poddar Group is not known for real estate, however, we entered the industry to work for the Affordable Housing Scheme of the Government of India. Since the inception, we had followed the best practices but with the formation of MahaRERA made a gigantic difference in making the people understand the right developer.” As a consequence of the formation of MahaRERA platform, businesses have seen a positive rise, he added.

He expressed his gratitude towards MahaRERA saying, “I am thankful to MahaRERA for drawing a clear line between the ethical and non-ethical developers. This has not only helped the customers to buy better but has also been of great help to those who are clean. I hope this continues in the future as well. Also, I hope to see more performance-based matrices to be launched for helping people to buy the best.”

Calling RERA a pro-economy measure, Poddar said that before this came in existence there was a division of trust among the buyers. Therefore, the RERA is neither a pro-customer nor a pro-developer but a pro-economy measure. “It has made the entire system more transparent and accountable. Moreover, it helped in the growth of GDP and it will also help the real estate sector to have a significantly higher percentage of the GDP as we grow forward and become a more developed economy.”

He backed the words of Nayan A Shah, saying, “If we have RERA address the interests of all the stakeholder and hold all stakeholders responsible, I completely agree that we have to have regulatory authorities.” On this note, he requested the RERA authorities to consider the concern raised that is holding each stakeholder responsible. “In affordable housing, we work on very thin margins and delays in getting approvals makes the project costlier for the customer or our project become unviable to the degree that we cannot launch it”, added Poddar as he concludes his address.

Raising a request following the valediction of Rohitashwa Poddar’s address, Nayan A Shah raised a concern to Dr Vijay Satbir Singh that there are two legislations that govern the real estate sector in Maharashtra, Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (MOFA) and MahaRERA. “This causes confusion. We request you to kindly look into it that if MOFA can be scrapped so that there is only one legislation.”

Source: https://egov.eletsonline.com/2021/05/maharera-parts-ethical-from-unethical-developers-rohitashwa-poddar/

SRA gives project back to developer booked for cheating buyer Vile Parle Police booked two developers acting on a complaint of a homebuyer who has been duped on the pretext of getting the possession of his booked flat. The complainant had given a demand draft of Rs 95 lakh to book the flat, but the developers have not handed over the flat to him. The MahaRERA orders stated that the developers should pay Rs 1 lakh per month for delaying possession. And, they are yet to pay a total of Rs 18 lakh as penalty.

According to the police, the complainant said, in a statement, that he had booked flat 1101 in a Vile Parle building and had paid Rs 95 lakhs as the booking amount. Even after repeated reminders to give the possession of the flat, the developers kept delaying it and the matter ended up in the MahaRERA court. The MahaRERA court had ordered the developers to pay a penalty of Rs 1 lakh to the complainant until the possession is given, which the developers allegedly failed to.

Acting on this information, the complainant approached the police and lodged a complaint of cheating, forgery and common intention against them. After valid points were observed in the complaint letter, a case was lodged against them on April 7 for violating the MahaRERA orders by not paying a total of Rs 18 lakh as penalty, as directed, for not giving the possession of the flat.

Source: https://www.freepressjournal.in/mumbai/mumbai-developers-booked-for-cheating-homebuyer-and-violating-maharera-orders