Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Balaji Construction Company, a promoter, entered into agreements with various allottees for the sale of apartments in a project. The agreements stipulated a possession date, which the promoter failed to meet. The allottees filed complaints before the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) seeking refund with interest under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Authority dismissed the complaints, holding that the delay was due to force majeure. The allottees appealed to the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, which allowed the appeals and directed the promoter to refund the amounts paid with interest. The promoter filed second appeals before the High Court under Section 58 of the RERA Act. The High Court considered whether the Appellate Tribunal's order was sustainable. The court noted that the promoter had failed to deliver possession within the agreed period, which constitutes 'default' under Section 18. The promoter's claim of force majeure was not supported by evidence. The court held that the Appellate Tribunal had correctly applied the law and directed refund with interest. The High Court dismissed the second appeals, finding no substantial question of law involved. The court also disposed of the interim applications.
Headnote
A) Real Estate Law - Default in Possession - Section 18 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Refund with Interest - The appellant-promoter failed to deliver possession of the apartment within the stipulated period as per the agreement. The allottees sought refund under Section 18. The Appellate Tribunal directed refund with interest. The High Court held that failure to deliver possession within the agreed time constitutes 'default' under Section 18, entitling the allottee to refund with interest. The promoter's plea of force majeure was rejected as no evidence was produced. (Paras 1-20) B) Real Estate Law - Appellate Tribunal's Powers - Section 44 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The Appellate Tribunal has the power to pass interim orders and final orders including refund. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order as it was within its jurisdiction and based on facts. (Paras 15-18) C) Real Estate Law - Second Appeal - Section 58 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The High Court's jurisdiction in second appeal is limited to substantial questions of law. The court found no substantial question of law involved as the Tribunal's findings were based on evidence and law. (Paras 19-20)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing the promoter to refund the amounts paid by the allottees with interest for failure to deliver possession within the agreed period, and whether such direction is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed all the second appeals, upholding the order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing the appellant to refund the amounts paid by the allottees with interest. The interim applications were also disposed of.
Law Points
- Section 18 of RERA Act
- 2016
- Default in possession
- Refund with interest
- Promoter's obligation
- Appellate Tribunal's powers
- Second appeal under Section 58 of RERA Act
