Square Feat India

  • Home
  • Square Feat India

Square Feat India Square Feat India, Is a Real Estate News Website. Focusing on different aspects of real estate news.

02/10/2026

Builder Delays 674 Days, Cites Grandmother’s Death, Shows No Certificate, Loses Case

A Pune promoter who came to the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal 674 days late has lost the appeal.

M/s P.R. Builders & Developers, through authorised partner Sachin Prakash Dhavle of Akurdi, challenged a non-compliance order. The reason offered for the delay included non-receipt of notices, oversight, a partner being out of station, and illness and death of the applicant’s grandmother. The Tribunal recorded that no death certificate, medical certificate, hospital record or travel document was filed.

The allottee is Atul Dilip Bhagwat of Chinchwad. The complaint is CC005000000054043, filed on 3 March 2020. MahaRERA’s order is dated 4 December 2023 and was passed ex parte. The Adjudicating Officer’s non-compliance order is dated 8 April 2024. The Tehsildar, Mulshi, attached property on 29 September 2025. An order for sale of the attached property was passed on 1 April 2026. The appeal followed within days.

On 29 September 2026 the Tribunal rejected Misc. Application No. 693 of 2026. Appeal No. AT05/00605 of 2026 does not survive. The stay application and the application for production of documents are disposed of. Misc. Application No. 874 of 2026 is allowed: the Registry is to release to the allottee the amount deposited under the proviso to Section 43(5) of the RERA Act.

The bench was Chairperson S.S. Shinde and Member (A) Shrikant M. Deshpande. The order says a commercial promoter cannot rest on an unproved family excuse, and that entertaining the appeal now would send the allottee back to the start after recovery had reached sale stage.

The Tribunal has not ordered a fresh auction. It has refused to condone the delay, so the April 2026 sale order is no longer under this appeal.

Keywords: MahaRERA, Appellate Tribunal, P.R. Builders and Developers, 674 days, grandmother death, no certificate, Atul Dilip Bhagwat, Mulshi attachment, Section 43(5)

01/10/2026

Builder Has To Complete Society Redevelopment In 2 Years Now

Big update for Maharashtra housing societies! New GR SGRYO-2026/Pr.Kr.108/14-S (30 Sept 2026) issued by the Cooperation, Marketing & Textiles Department mandates:

Builder must complete redevelopment within 2 years from plinth certificate (max 3 years in exceptional cases).

Mandatory PMC report within 2 months of appointment.

Minimum 3 competitive developer bids.

Registrar’s authorised officer must be present at developer selection meeting.

Video recording of key meetings; all records free for members.

Registered Permanent Alternative Accommodation Agreement before members shift out.
Aim: faster projects, more transparency, stronger member rights.

30/09/2026

Builder Must Give Mira Road Flat at 2009 Rate or Pay ₹1.1 Crore

A major consumer-law relief for a Mira Road homebuyer.

The Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra State, Mumbai, has directed Rockline Construction Company and RNA Corporation to provide an alternative 763 sq. ft. flat at the original 2009 rate of ₹3,100 per sq. ft.

The order was pronounced on 22 September 2026 in Consumer Complaint No. CC/129/2015, filed by Bhupendra D. Trivedi.

The matter was decided by a Bench comprising Ms. Poonam V. Maharshi, Presiding Member, and Dr. Nisha Amol Chavhan, Member.

The buyer said he booked Flat No. Unit-3L/14 in 2009 and paid ₹5 lakh as the initial booking amount. He claimed that he was ready to arrange the balance payment through a bank loan, but the developers failed to execute and register the Agreement for Sale.

He later alleged that the developers demanded ₹7,000 per sq. ft. instead of honouring the original rate and that his booked flat had been sold and handed over to a third party.

The Commission noted that the developers did not file a written version and remained absent despite directions to appear. It held both developers jointly and severally liable for deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

The developers have been directed to provide a vacant and peaceful 763 sq. ft. alternative flat in the same project or the immediate vicinity of Mira Road at the original rate of ₹3,100 per sq. ft., and to execute and register the Agreement for Sale within 60 days.

If they cannot provide the alternative flat, they must pay:

₹85 lakh with 10% annual interest.

₹25 lakh for the rise in property prices.

₹1 lakh for mental agony and harassment.

₹50,000 towards litigation costs.

The fixed monetary relief totals ₹1.11 crore, apart from interest on the ₹85 lakh refund. A 12% annual interest rate will apply to the financial awards from the date of default if the order is not complied with within the prescribed period.

The Commission also referred to the statutory obligation under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963.

The case is a reminder that builders may face financial consequences for failing to execute agreements, retaining buyers’ money, reselling booked units and later demanding inflated prices.

29/09/2026

Flat Transfer: Anything Above Rs 25,000 Can Be Taken Back

A Kandivali housing society has been told to return money it kept over and above the legal transfer premium.

Co-operative Court No. 3, Mumbai, Judge V. R. Kulkarni, decided Dispute No. CC/III/463/2022 on 22 September 2026. Members Jignesh Khiraiya and Kusum K. Khiraiya had paid RNA Regency Park Tower CHS Ltd. Rs 75,000 in June 2017 as a “non-refundable car parking deposit”, on top of Rs 25,000 transfer premium, under a 10 June 2012 general body resolution. The society later adjusted Rs 25,000 and retained Rs 50,000.

The court held that the extra sum was an additional transfer collection. A general body cannot authorise a levy beyond the 9 August 2001 directive, which caps transfer premium at Rs 25,000 in municipal corporation areas. The society produced no proof that the money funded repairs of about Rs 9 lakh. The claim for 21 per cent interest was rejected.

Order: refund of Rs 50,000 with simple interest at 6 per cent from 30 January 2022 until realisation, plus costs. The order does not ban every lawful parking charge. It strikes down this lump sum taken at the time of transfer.

RNA Regency Park Tower CHS, Kandivali West, CC/III/463/2022, Judge V R Kulkarni, transfer premium, Rs 25000, parking deposit, Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act

Hashtags:

28/09/2026

HomeBuyers Can Take Delay Interest Now, Must Return It If Builder Wins Appeal

The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai on 22 September 2026 allowed two homebuyers to withdraw the delay-interest money deposited by their promoter, but they must return it if the builder wins the appeals.

Parties: Matrix Enclaves Projects Development Pvt. Ltd. versus Mr. Satyawan Appaji Ghagare & Ors. and Shyam Ram More.

Cases: M.A. No. 1766/26 in Appeal No. AT006/00792/2025 and M.A. No. 1623/26 in Appeal No. AT006/00820/2025.

Bench: Chairperson Shri S.S. Shinde J. and Member Shri Shrikant M. Deshpande. Order pronounced on 22 September 2026.

MahaRERA had on 19 June 2025 directed the promoter to pay interest under Section 18 of RERA for delay in possession. The promoter deposited Rs. 2,79,723 and Rs. 4,48,828 to file appeals. Buyers already have possession and have been paying EMIs. The Tribunal released both amounts plus accrued interest, subject only to an undertaking that the money will be brought back if the promoter succeeds. A bank guarantee was not required. The main appeals are still pending.

This order gives immediate cash relief to allottees while keeping the builder’s right of recovery intact if it wins.

Address


Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Square Feat India posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

  • Want your business to be the top-listed media company?

Share