Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Edcon Real Estate Developers, a registered partnership firm, filed a Second Appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act) against the order of the Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the Appellate Tribunal. The appellant had applied for registration of a real estate project under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the RERA Act. The appellant submitted a Development Agreement dated 01.02.2020 executed between itself and the landowners. The RERA Authority refused to process the application, insisting that the Development Agreement must first be compulsorily registered under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908. The appellant challenged this before the Appellate Tribunal, which upheld the Authority's decision. The appellant then appealed to the High Court. The core legal issue was whether the RERA Authority had jurisdiction to require compulsory registration of a Development Agreement as a precondition for project registration. The appellant argued that the Authority's powers are limited to the conditions specified in Section 4 of the RERA Act and that the Development Agreement was not compulsorily registrable as it did not create or transfer any interest in immovable property. The respondent argued that the Authority had the power to scrutinize documents and that the agreement required registration. The High Court analyzed the provisions of the RERA Act and the Registration Act. It held that the Authority's jurisdiction is confined to ensuring compliance with Section 4 of the RERA Act and does not extend to adjudicating on the registrability of documents under the Registration Act. The Court further held that the Development Agreement, being a license to develop and sell, did not create any right, title, or interest in the land and thus was not compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of the Registration Act. The Court also clarified that Section 13 of the RERA Act applies only to agreements for sale with allottees, not to agreements between the promoter and landowners. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the orders of the Authority and the Tribunal, and directed the Authority to process the appellant's application for registration in accordance with law, without insisting on registration of the Development Agreement.
Headnote
A) Real Estate Law - RERA Registration - Jurisdiction of Regulatory Authority - Sections 3, 4, 13, 58 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The Authority cannot impose conditions beyond those specified in Section 4 of the RERA Act for registration of a project. The insistence on compulsory registration of a Development Agreement under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, is ultra vires the RERA Act. Held that the Authority's power is limited to scrutinizing compliance with Section 4 requirements and does not extend to adjudicating on the registrability of documents under the Registration Act (Paras 2, 45-50). B) Registration Act - Compulsory Registration - Development Agreement - Section 17 of Registration Act, 1908 - A Development Agreement that does not create or transfer any right, title, or interest in immovable property is not compulsorily registrable. The agreement in question was merely a license to develop and sell, not a conveyance. Held that the Authority erred in treating it as requiring registration (Paras 30-35). C) Real Estate Law - RERA - Scope of Section 13 - Section 13 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - Section 13 applies only to agreements for sale between the promoter and allottees, not to agreements between the promoter and landowners. The Authority cannot rely on Section 13 to require registration of a development agreement. Held that the Tribunal's reliance on Section 13 was misplaced (Paras 40-44).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority had jurisdiction to insist on compulsory registration of a Development Agreement under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908, as a precondition for processing an application for registration of a real estate project under Sections 3 and 4 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Second Appeal, set aside the orders of the Goa Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the Appellate Tribunal, and directed the Authority to process the appellant's application for registration of the project in accordance with law, without insisting on compulsory registration of the Development Agreement under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908.
Law Points
- RERA Authority's jurisdiction limited to conditions under Section 4 of RERA Act
- 2016
- Development Agreement not compulsorily registrable under Section 17 of Registration Act
- 1908 if it does not create or transfer interest in immovable property
- Section 13 of RERA Act applies only to agreements with allottees
- not to developer-landowner agreements
