Maharashtra REAT: Pre-RERA Sale Agreement Falls Within Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act
Maharashtra REAT: Pre-RERA Sale Agreement Falls Within Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act
The appellant registered the project under Section 4 of RERA during the construction phase
The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has held that provisions of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), 2016, are prospective in nature.
The bench comprising Justice Shriram R. Jagtap (Judicial Member) and Dr. K Shivaji (Technical Member) further stated that the provisions applied to all agreements for sale executed before the Act’s enactment, or any previous legislation, then in force.
In 2009, the appellant (Promoter), developing a residential project DB Ozone on Mira Road, Thane district, entered an agreement for sale with the respondents (Allotees). The agreement stipulated possession by December 2014, with a one-year grace period.
During the construction phase, the RERA Act was enacted, and the appellant registered the project under Section 4.
The appellant failed to deliver the possession within the agreed time limit. It cited factors such as material shortages and regulatory delays that were beyond its control.
As a result, the respondents filed complaints before MahaRERA, seeking possession and compensation for the prolonged delay.
The appellant contended that the RERA Act was not applicable in its case, as the transactions executed between the parties were under the provisions of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management, and Transfer) Act, 1963, which was still in force.
However, in its 02 January 2020 order, MahaRERA held the appellant liable for the delay in possession of the booked flats and ordered it to pay an interest.
Thereafter, the appellant filed an appeal before the tribunal against the RERA’s order.
While dismissing the application, the tribunal held that the provisions of the RERA Act were prospective and applicable to all agreements. It was irrelevant whether the agreement was executed under a different legislative regime. If the project was registered under the Act, it fell within its purview.
