MUMBAI: A home buyer from Kandivli who filed a complaint with Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) in July 2023 was called for a hearing only earlier last month.
In another instance, home buyers in another Kandivli project are awaiting possession of their homes, despite the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT) in 2022 directing the promoter to complete construction that was to start in 2010 within a year, and pay interest to home buyers until possession. Home buyers alleged that not a single brick has been laid in the project till date and allottees have been left in the lurch.
A large number of complaints have burdened the limited number of MahaRERA benches. Around 7,500 complaints are pending with the authority.
Now, the current MahaRERA chairman Manoj Saunik has been working on a war-footing to clear pending complaints by hearing as many as 200 complaints per day. That apart, execution of orders including recovery warrants is a problem area.
Advocates said promoters do not adhere to orders and instances of contempt are often witnessed, as regulatory authorities are not exercising their powers including that of prosecution to ensure developers fall in line.
Lack of a proper mechanism for effective execution of recovery warrants through district collectors still plagues the system and it is left to home buyers to pursue the revenue authorities for recovery of their money. Even the conciliation system, which witnessed success initially in resolving disputes, now sees fewer complaint resolutions.
“In 2022, MREAT had ordered a developer to complete construction of the Kandivli project within a year and hand over possession to allottees. If the builder is not able to complete the project, the allottees can form an association and seek to take over the project. When allottees booked their flats in 2011, the market rate was Rs 7,500 per square foot, it is Rs 25,000 now. Even after a judgment was passed by MREAT, which the developer is bound by and has not even challenged, there is no compliance. An example ought to be set by prosecuting those who do not adhere to judgements, only then will the developers be compelled to fulfil their duties,” said a leading real estate broker, who also pointed out there is an option of ordering for a civil imprisonment and that it should be exercised.Advocate Nilesh Gala, who practises at MahaRERA, said there is a need for systemic changes. “Transfer of ownership of the developer firms or the projects has taken place without the consent of two-third allottees, who have booked with erstwhile promoters. There are also instances of two MahaRERA registration numbers being given for the same project,” Gala alleged, adding a change in the shareholding or ownership of firms of developers should not be allowed, unless they seek an NOC from MahaRERA.
Given the pendency of cases, Gala said promoters should be given a deadline of 30 days to file their reply and have sought for an increased number of benches of MahaRERA as well as MREAT. However, Gala added the current chairman has set things in motion and is trying to reduce the pendency of complaints.
“There should be an institutional mechanism for MahaRERA to pursue execution of recovery warrants and the burden should not be on the home buyer,” Gala added.
Shirish Deshpande, Chairman of Mumbai Grahak Panchayat, wanted MahaRERA to resume physical hearing or even hybrid hearings. Pointing to fewer complaints being resolved through conciliation, Deshpande said “Conciliation is a major part of MahaRERA and initially it saw 80 to 90 % success rate, when there was no involvement of advocates. After MahaRERA allowed advocates to join the conciliation process, the success rate has come down to just 30 percent.”
Referring to another problem area in the functioning of MahaRERA, Deshpande said that “MahaRERA does not hear complaints of redevelopment projects. However, the definition of “allottee” in real estate projects covers those who are part of redevelopment or SRA projects.”
