Pulin Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd -Vs- Tirupati Developers

Posted On - 9 July, 2024 • By - Antony Shyam Sundar

Background of the case:

[1]City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) have leased a property to the complainant society, Pulin Co-Operative Housing Ltd, where the complainant society executed a development agreement providing all development rights to J.P. Builders & Developers for developing the said plot. The J.P. Builders assigned the development rights to the respondent, Tirupati Developers and the respondent obtained various permissions from the competent authority and registered the project with the Maha-RERA. Both J.P. Builders and the respondent (Tirupati Developers) constructed 3 illegal floors above 4 storey’s with a total of 29 flats and 10 shops without legal sanction and approval from CIDCO. Citing this, the complainant society alleged various other violations of various terms and conditions of the Development Agreement and terminated the same in a General Body Meeting. After this, the Respondents filed a suit for specific performance before the Civil Court, while the Complainants filed before the RERA court seeking revocation of the registration of the Project.

Contentions

The Complainants contended that the respondent promoter had done various illegalities including the construction of 3 additional floors. They stated that permission was given only for the construction of 17 flats and by constructing an additional 3 floors, the number of flats increased to 29. By doing this, the area mentioned is more than what was available in the Occupancy Certificate, following this they sought several specific reliefs.

On the other hand, the Respondents contended that the specific reliefs sought by the complainants are not valid because as this matter arises out of a dispute in Development Agreements, it is not maintainable under the provisions of RERA. Also, on the ground that the issues raised by the complainant are related to the Planning Authority and therefore again not maintainable in this Court.

Issues

  1. Whether the suit was maintainable in the court of Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Maharashtra RERA)?
    1. On the issue of illegal constructions made by the respondent.
    1. On the issue of dispute arising out of the Development Agreement.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the suit on the issue of maintainability of the case in relation to illegal construction does not fall under the purview of their court. The Court noted that construction permissions fall within the view of the Maharashtra and Town Planning Act, 1966, and therefore cannot be dealt with by the Maharashtra RERA.

On the second issue of alleged violations of terms and conditions of the Development Agreement and the complainant’s request to revoke the project registration in favour of the respondent, the Court answered again in negation. They reasoned that there are no explicit provisions under RERA that allow them to try disputes arising out of Development Agreements. Hence, the same should be filed before the Civil Court, as the dispute is of a civil nature, ordering the parties to contest their grievances in the civil suit that had already been filed. 

Conclusion

Based on the court’s reasoning, the suit filed by the complainants before Maharashtra RERA:

  • Illegal Constructions: The court found that issues related to illegal constructions are governed by town planning laws and are outside the jurisdiction of Maharashtra RERA. Therefore, Maharashtra RERA cannot entertain claims solely based on illegal constructions.
  • Development Agreement Disputes: The court determined that disputes arising from Development Agreements are not under the purview of Maharashtra RERA, as it primarily focuses on regulatory aspects of real estate projects. These disputes should be resolved through civil court proceedings.

Thus, the court concluded that the complainants’ claims were not maintainable under Maharashtra RERA and directed them to pursue their claims in the appropriate civil court.

[1] (Complaint No. CC006000000209962) Maharashtra RERA (Mumbai) Order Dated 10.06.2024