MOHD ZAIN KHAN vs. MAHARERA (2018)

LEGAL SUBJECTS - Real Estate Law, Statutory Interpretation, Consumer Protection Law, Administrative Law, Contract Law

CITATION OF THE CASE - 

W. P. (L) NO.3991 OF 2018

FACTS -

 It revolves around a complaint filed by one Mr. Khan regarding two real estate projects in Lonavala, specifically the Valvan Valley NA bungalow scheme and the Lion’s Valley project, promoted by Emnoy Properties. Mr. Khan had invested ₹12.50 lakh in the Valvan Valley project in 2012, under the assurance that the agricultural land would be converted to non-agricultural land. However, the promoters failed to obtain necessary permissions and did not register the projects with MahaRERA, which is required under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA). On September 5, 2018, MahaRERA dismissed Mr. Khan's complaint, stating that the plots were agricultural land and did not qualify as a real estate project under RERA due to a lack of necessary approvals. Khan claimed that this dismissal was unfair as he was not allowed to present evidence supporting his case. 

 ISSUES -

a)     Whether MahaRERA's dismissal of Mr.Khan's complaint regarding unregistered projects justified?  Whether promoters of unregistered projects could be held accountable under RERA provisions, despite their non-registration?

       DECISION BY COURT -

      The Bombay High Court, during the proceedings, directed MahaRERA to accept complaints related to unregistered projects. This decision came after it was revealed that MahaRERA had previously denied Mr. Khan's right to appeal against the dismissal of his complaint.  The court emphasized that aggrieved individuals should be allowed to seek redress for violations under RERA, regardless of project registration status. Following this ruling, MahaRERA acknowledged that it would entertain appeals concerning unregistered projects. 

       IMPORTANCE OF THE CASE -

       It establishes a critical precedent allowing homebuyers to file complaints against promoters of unregistered projects, thereby enhancing consumer protection under RERA.  The ruling holds regulatory authorities accountable for their processes and encourages them to facilitate justice for aggrieved parties.  The case clarifies that even unregistered projects can be subject to complaints regarding violations of RERA provisions, reinforcing the rights of consumers in the real estate sector.

      Compiled by Adv. Bincy Benny, Research and Training Admin, ATPA.