In an unusual case highlighting the wide applicability of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), an infrastructure company successfully approached the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) seeking enforcement of its rights as a homebuyer. The matter involved Capacit’e Infraprojects Limited, which had been allotted two residential flats in a stalled Mumbai housing project as part of a settlement for unpaid construction dues.
The dispute arose from the Avenue 54 project located in Santacruz West, Mumbai. According to the complaint filed before MahaRERA, the project promoters—Sumer Radius Realty Private Limited, Sumer Buildcorp Private Limited, and Radius Estate Projects Private Limited—had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Capacit’e Infraprojects on January 24, 2020. Under the arrangement, two residential units were allocated to the infrastructure company in lieu of outstanding payments owed for construction work executed by the firm.
Capacit’e Infraprojects argued that although the flats had been allotted and the full consideration had effectively been paid through adjustment of dues, the promoters failed to execute and register formal agreements for sale as mandated under Section 13(1) of the RERA Act. The provision prohibits developers from accepting more than 10% of a property’s value without first executing and registering a written agreement for sale.
The complainant further alleged that the project’s completion timeline had been revised without proper communication and that repeated requests for execution of the sale agreements were ignored. Notably, the promoters neither appeared before MahaRERA nor submitted any response, leading the proceedings to continue ex-parte.
After reviewing the records, MahaRERA member Ravindra Deshpande observed that the infrastructure firm’s claims remained substantially uncontested. The authority noted that the MoU and allotment letters clearly established that the two flats had been earmarked for transfer in settlement of the promoters’ liabilities. Since the promoters had already received the full consideration, their failure to execute registered sale agreements constituted a violation of Section 13(1) of the RERA Act.
However, MahaRERA also clarified that an unregistered MoU cannot substitute for a legally valid and registered agreement for sale under the statutory framework. The authority pointed out that the project itself had been stalled and its revised completion deadline had already expired. Therefore, directing the execution of sale agreements alone would not resolve the issue unless the project was first revived.
In its order dated May 27, MahaRERA partly allowed the complaint and directed the promoters to remove the project from the authority’s abeyance list within 30 days. Failure to comply could attract penalties under Section 61 of the RERA Act, which deals with violations by promoters, including delays in project completion.
The authority further directed that upon revival of the project, the developers must execute and register agreements for sale for the two allotted flats. Additionally, the promoters were ordered to pay ₹20,000 towards litigation costs incurred by Capacit’e Infraprojects. MahaRERA also instructed the complainant to pay an additional ₹5,000 fee for including two housing units within a single complaint.
Image- maharera.maharashtra.gov.in
