REAT Maharashtra (2026.06.09) Shree Sankalp Associates Vs. Mr. Vishal Jugalkishor Pallod [Appeal No. ATO5 100276 of 2026 Along with Misc. Application No.294 of 2026 (Stay)] held that;
Thus, it is clear that during the reconciliation, the issue of possession was settled. However, there is no discussion or record in the minutes of the conciliation that the complainant has waived off its right to receive interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 on account of delay in possession. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the contention of the appellant/promoter that the said settlement arrived at before the Conciliation Forum constitutes full and final resolution of the claims relating to both possession and interest is not tenable.
In view of the above settled position of law, statutory right to claim relief of interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 is indefensible and unconditional right that cannot be defeated for any reasons. Therefore, in our view the impugned order is sustainable in the eyes of law and does not warrant any interference in this appeal.
Excerpts of the Order;
# 1. The captioned appeal arises from the order dated 17.12.2025 passed by the learned Member-I, Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (for short "the AuthorityJ in the captioned complaint filed by the respondent herein/allottee.
# 2. The appellant is the promoter of the project in the name and style as "The Legend Phase II" bearing MahaRERA Project Registration No. P52100025986 located at Hinjewadi, Mulshi, Dist. Pune.
# 3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the appeal will be hereinafter referred to as “appellant/promoter" and "complainant/aIlottee" respectively.
# 4. The brief facts gathered from the pleadings, impugned order, and the material placed on record reveal that the complainant/allottee is a sole proprietor of the marketing firm "Sun Publicity". Sometime in May, 2021 the promoter approached the complainant for seeking his marketing services and appointed him as Marketing Representative. It was agreed between the parties that in lieu of payment of professional fees, the title of one residential unit in the said project will be transferred to the complainant as consideration for the services rendered. Accordingly, the memorandum of understanding dated 05.05.2021 was signed between the parties, which also formed part of the agreement for sale signed between them. Out of the professional fees, Rs.15,00,000/- were adjusted as part of the consideration of the flat. The agreement for sale dated 28.03.2022 came to be executed and registered. As per the said agreement for sale, the due date of possession is 30.06.2024. However, the promoter failed to hand over possession of the said flat to the complainant by the said due date and withheld the possession even when the promoter obtained occupation certificate on 21.10.2024. Aggrieved by the above, the allottee/complainant filed the captioned complaint on 12.07.2024 before the Authority seeking relief of possession of the said flat along with interest on account of delay in possession and compensation under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (for short 'the RERA Act, 2016).
# 5. The promoter appeared in the said complaint and remonstrated the complaint contending that the possession of the flat has already been handed over to the complainant on 23.10.2024 and the possession letter is also executed. Hence, the claim sought by the complainant does not survive.
# 6. It transpires that during the conciliation proceedings on 26.09.2024, the parties arrived at an amicable settlement, pursuant to which the complainant agreed to pay Rs.25,00,000/- of balance consideration amount and upon receipt thereof the promoter agreed to hand over possession of the flat to the complainant, which was subsequently handed over on 23.10.2024 upon receipt of the said balance consideration amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from the complainant. Thus, the settlement was acted upon by the parties and the dispute was amicably settled.
# 7. Record reveals that the complainant made payments of the consideration amount as per the following details:
# 8. After hearing the parties, the Authority passed the impugned order. In the impugned order, the Authority observed that the due date of possession as per the said agreement for sale is 30.06.2024, whereas the occupation certificate was obtained on 21.10,2024 and possession was handed over on 23.10.2024. Therefore, the complainant is entitled to receive interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 on account of delay in possession. Further, the promoter has not placed on record any justification for the delay in possession. With these observations, the Authority held that the complainant is entitled to interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 from 01.07.2024 till the offer of possession with occupation certificate dated 21.10.2024 on the actual amount paid by the complainant towards the consideration.
# 9. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant promoter has filed the captioned appeal challenging the impugned order on the grounds set out in the memorandum of appeal, seeking the following reliefs
a) Allow the appeal,
b) Set aside the impugned order,
c) Hold that the settlement arrived at before the Conciliation Forum constitutes full and final resolution of claims relating to possession and interest,
d) Dismiss the complaint.
# 10. We have heard the learned Advocate for the appellant. Record reveals that none appeared for respondent/allottee. Further, respondent neither filed any reply nor written submissions. Therefore, the averments of the appellant/promoter remained uncontroverted by the respondent/allottee.
# 11. We have given due consideration to the submissions of the appellant and material on record. The submissions of the learned Advocate for the appellant are nothing but reiteration of the contents of the memorandum of appeal. Having examined the submissions of the appellant and the material on record, the following points arise for our consideration and we have recorded our findings thereon for the reasons to follow, as under.
REASONS
Point No.1
# 12. On ensemble of the facts as submitted by the appellant and the material on record, it is not in dispute that the respondent/allottee purchased the said flat vide an agreement for sale dated 28.03.2022. Out of total consideration amount, the respondent/allottee has paid Rs.15,00,00/- to the promoter. As per the said agreement for sale, the due date of possession is 30.06.2024. The promoter obtained occupation certificate of the building covering the subject flat on 21.10.2024. The promoter handed over the possession of the flat to the respondent/allottee on 23.10.2024 after receipt of the balance consideration amount of Rs.25,00,000/-. The complaint is filed on 12.07,2024. Thus, the amount paid by the respondent prior to filing of the complaint is Rs.15,00,000/-. As the due date of possession of the flat as per the said agreement for sale is 30,06.2024, whereas the promoter obtained occupation certificate on 21.10.2023. This sufficiently demonstrates that the promoter failed to hand over possession by the due date of possession as specified in the agreement for sale,
# 13. Record reveals that vide roznama dated 05.08.2024, the complainant has sought the matter to be referred to for reconciliation to explore the possibility of amicable settlement. The roznama dated 26.09.2024 of the Conciliation records as under:
"The respondent has committed to give possession of the flat post receiving outstanding payment along with GST amount from the complainant. The complainant has agreed to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.25,00,000/- plus GST amount to the respondent within 15 days from this hearing. The parties have resolved, and the matter is adjourned for a final hearing to document an amicable settlement."
# 14.When the matter was finally heard by the Authority, the Authority in the impugned order recorded that though the issue of possession was subsequently resolved during the pendency of the complaint, the MahaRERA is required to adjudicate the substantive issue of interest and compensation sought by the complainant under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016. Thus, it is clear that during the reconciliation, the issue of possession was settled. However, there is no discussion or record in the minutes of the conciliation that the complainant has waived off its right to receive interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 on account of delay in possession. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the contention of the appellant/promoter that the said settlement arrived at before the Conciliation Forum constitutes full and final resolution of the claims relating to both possession and interest is not tenable.
# 15. As we have already observed, the due date of possession is 30.06.2024, whereas the promoter obtained occupation certificate on 21.10.2024. This sufficiently demonstrates that the promoter failed to hand over possession of the flat by the due date of possession as specified in the agreement for sale, Therefore, the complainant is entitled to relief of interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016, on account of delay in possession. We also note that the Authority has observed that the promoter has failed to place on record any justified reasons for delay in handing over possession of the said flat as per the agreed date of possession in the agreement for sale.
# 16. While explaining the scope of Section 18 of RERA, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s. Newtech Promoter and Developers Pvt, Ltd. V/s, State of Uttar Pradesh 1202t SCC Online 10441 dated 11 November, 2021 held that;
"Para 25, The unqualified right of the allottee to seek refund referred under Section 18(1)(a) and Section 19(4) of the Act is not dependent on any contingencies or stipulations thereof. It appears that the legislature has consciously provided this right of refund on demand as an unconditional absolute right to the allottee, if the promoter fails to give possession of the apartment, plot or building within the time stipulated under the terms of the agreement regardless of unforeseen events or stay orders of the Court/Tribunal, which is in either way not attributable to the allottee/home buyer, the promoter is under an obligation to refund the amount on demand with interest at the rate prescribed by the State Government including compensation in the manner provided under the Act with the proviso that if the allottee does not wish to withdraw from the project, he shall be entitled for interest for the period of delay till handing over possession at the rate prescribed."
# 17. In view of the above settled position of law, statutory right to claim relief of interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 is indefensible and unconditional right that cannot be defeated for any reasons. Therefore, in our view the impugned order is sustainable in the eyes of law and does not warrant any interference in this appeal. Accordingly, we answer point no.1 in the negative.
# 18. It is pertinent that the complainant has paid only Rs.15,00,000/- prior to filing of the complaint. Further, the outstanding amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- has been paid after obtaining of the occupation certificate and before taking possession. Hence, the complainant is entitled to interest under section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016 only on the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- with effect from 01.07.2024 till 23.10,2024. The impugned order is required to be clarified to this extent in order to bring clarity to the operative part of the impugned order.
# 19. Accordingly, we pass the following order.
ORDER
1. The captioned Appeal No.AT05/00276 of 2026 in complaint no. CC00500000047 L2B4 is dismissed.
2. The impugned order is confirmed. However, it is clarified that the respondent/complainant is entitled to interest under section 18 of the RERA Act, 2015 on account of delay in possession only on the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest rate at the SBI's Highest Marginal Cost Lending Rate plus 2% from 01.07.2024 till 23.10.2024, which the promoter/appellant shall pay to the respondent/allottee within 30 days of this order, failing which the promoter shall pay further interest on the said amount outstanding as on 09.07.2026 with the same rate of interest as prescribed above till the amount is realized to the respondent/allottee.
3. In view of disposal of the appeal nothing survives for our consideration in Misc. Application No.294 of 2026 (Stay) and hence, same is also disposed of.
4. Parties to bear their own costs
5. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of in above terms.
6. Copy of this Order be communicated to the Authority and the respective parties as per Section 44(4) of RERA Act, 2016.
------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment