- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Homebuyers Lose Appeal: Signed Waiver Blocks Relief in MahaRERA Dispute
Homebuyers Lose Appeal: Signed Waiver Blocks Relief in MahaRERA Dispute
A recent decision by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT) has underscored the importance of written agreements in real estate disputes. The case involved a homebuyer couple who signed a declaration waiving all grievances against the builder, only to later appeal for remedies related to those same issues.
The couple had purchased a flat in January 2016 with a promised possession date in December of that same year. They paid a significant portion of the total cost (₹2,08,83,300) on time, but the builder delivered the flat late. Frustrated by the delay, the homebuyers filed a complaint with MahaRERA seeking possession of the flat, compensation for the delayed possession, and additional compensation for mental harassment caused by the breach of contract.
MahaRERA partially ruled in favour of the homebuyers, directing the builder to deliver possession of the flat within 15 days of the order (October 2018). However, the tribunal led by Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K. Shivaji (Technical Member) did not address the homebuyers' requests for compensation or other remedies.
Dissatisfied with the partial relief, the homebuyers appealed to MahaREAT, seeking a wider range of remedies. The builder, however, countered their appeal by arguing that the homebuyers were informed about the flat being ready for possession and that they had not raised any complaints about deficiencies in their initial complaint to MahaRERA. Additionally, the builder pointed to a signed declaration by the homebuyers which stated that they had no grievances regarding the construction, amenities, or possession of the flat and that any claims they may have had were resolved to their complete satisfaction, and they waived all such claims.
Citing this signed declaration, MahaREAT dismissed the homebuyers' appeal. The tribunal emphasised that if a homebuyer agrees in writing that all their complaints have been addressed and resolved, they cannot later seek the same type of relief through an appeal.