Mumbai: The promoter of a real estate project at Mira Road must pay interest from 2013 on amounts paid by home buyers till actual granting of possession of the flat. The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal said this in a recent judgment. The tribunal’s judgment modified a 2019 order of the housing regulator, MahaRERA.
The tribunal stated that the housing regulator’s order “suffered from infirmities”, and it has also directed the promoter of the housing project, Neelkamal Realtors, to execute an agreement for sale and hand over possession of the flat at an early date on receiving the occupancy certificate.
The MahaRERA order, which directed the promoter to execute the agreement for sale, had denied interest to a home buyer who had booked a flat in 2010 and is yet to get its possession. The complainant couple had booked a flat for a total consideration of about Rs 40 lakh in Orchid Ozone in January 2010. A letter of allotment was issued and a sum of about Rs 3.64 lakh was paid by the couple.
Subsequently, the couple paid up to 90% of the consideration amount for the flat although there was no registered agreement between the parties.
According to the complainant couple, the promoters had orally agreed to hand over possession of the flat within three years from the date of allotment letter.
The complainant couple, who were represented by advocate Anil D’Souza, also claimed that the promoter had revised the project completion date several times.
The tribunal’s judgment points out that though the claims for delay in interest and execution of agreement are not mentioned in the impugned order, the order does not contain any negative findings as well against these claims of appellants. It is settled principle of law that if the claims made by appellants are not granted in the order, then, it is presumed to have been denied.
The judgment stated that as per section 11 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the promoter shall be responsible to make available to the allottee, the stage-wise time schedule of completion of the project, at the time of booking and issue of allotment letter and there are similar provisions casting general liabilities on the promoter in the erstwhile Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act of 1963.
The judges observed that despite the promoter having an onus to first execute an agreement for sale under section 13 of the Act, he accepted payments up to 90% of the consideration of the flat.
The demands raised by promoters for payments beyond 10% have clearly breached the upper ceiling prescribed under section 13 of the Act and section 4(1) of Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act.
The tribunal stated that the housing regulator’s order “suffered from infirmities”, and it has also directed the promoter of the housing project, Neelkamal Realtors, to execute an agreement for sale and hand over possession of the flat at an early date on receiving the occupancy certificate.
The MahaRERA order, which directed the promoter to execute the agreement for sale, had denied interest to a home buyer who had booked a flat in 2010 and is yet to get its possession. The complainant couple had booked a flat for a total consideration of about Rs 40 lakh in Orchid Ozone in January 2010. A letter of allotment was issued and a sum of about Rs 3.64 lakh was paid by the couple.
Subsequently, the couple paid up to 90% of the consideration amount for the flat although there was no registered agreement between the parties.
According to the complainant couple, the promoters had orally agreed to hand over possession of the flat within three years from the date of allotment letter.
The complainant couple, who were represented by advocate Anil D’Souza, also claimed that the promoter had revised the project completion date several times.
The tribunal’s judgment points out that though the claims for delay in interest and execution of agreement are not mentioned in the impugned order, the order does not contain any negative findings as well against these claims of appellants. It is settled principle of law that if the claims made by appellants are not granted in the order, then, it is presumed to have been denied.
The judgment stated that as per section 11 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the promoter shall be responsible to make available to the allottee, the stage-wise time schedule of completion of the project, at the time of booking and issue of allotment letter and there are similar provisions casting general liabilities on the promoter in the erstwhile Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act of 1963.
The judges observed that despite the promoter having an onus to first execute an agreement for sale under section 13 of the Act, he accepted payments up to 90% of the consideration of the flat.
The demands raised by promoters for payments beyond 10% have clearly breached the upper ceiling prescribed under section 13 of the Act and section 4(1) of Maharashtra Ownership of Flats Act.
