Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has asked two disputing developers to settle their internal differences, obtain the occupancy certificate (OC) from the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) and hand over possession to home-buyers of the stuck 17-storey luxury project at Andheri East.
The complainants Bharti and Amitkumar Lathiya had booked flats 816 and 817 in a project named Callista in April 2012. In 2016, the agreements for sale promising possession on or before 31 March 2018 were signed.
The apartments cost Rs76.50 lakh each and the home-buyers have already paid Rs60.30 lakh for each flat. But both the developers Charmi Nirman and Joy and Sayla Realtors failed to hand over possession on time. All construction stopped after October 2018.
MahaRERA member Dr Vijay Satbir Singh said that it is the statutory obligation of both developers as promoters to complete the construction of the project as per sanctioned plan, obtain the OC, and hand over possession of the units to the Callista allottees as per Section 19 of RERA.
The regulator held that both Charmi Nirman and Joy and Sayla Realtors, whose internal disputes have delayed the OC since 2018 are equally responsible for delivering the project. Charmi Nirman, the owner and developer of the said SRA project had given the development rights of the sale component to Joy and Sayla Realtors.
In 2019, the developer sent a letter informing the Lathiyas that their joint development partner Charmi Nirman has terminated the power of attorney, and the SRA has also issued stop work notice and, hence, they are unable to continue the construction till further approval comes. The letter also stated that the building cannot progress beyond 13 floors presently constructed but gave them the option to take refund.
Nilesh Gala, the lawyer for the Lathiyas, pointed out that though the developers projected a dispute between them, they had not taken any legal action against each other, and said his clients were being pressured to withdraw from the project and accept refund as prices in the area had increased manifold since their 2012 booking.
The lawyers for Joy and Sayla Realtors specified that under the SRA scheme, the benefits of approvals along with the FSI to be consumed in sale building are directly related to the development and progress of the rehab component and the FSI benefits accrue only when the corresponding rehab component is first completed by the developer. They then claimed that Charmi Nirman is responsible for the rehab component, paying pending transit rent of two years to slum-dwellers and that removing non-cooperating slum-dwellers is their responsibility. The lawyers claimed that Charmi Nirman was taking advantage of the fact that the sale component’s progress depends on the completion of rehab component and trying to create hindrances to obstruct the construction of Callista.
They also alleged that by not withdrawing a writ petition filed for eviction of a slum-dweller who has left his structure years ago, Charmi Nirman has been deliberately obstructing demolition of that structure which is currently occupied by third parties and thereby creating hindrances in the construction of the last rehab building.
The lawyers also claimed that Charmi Nirman had intentionally defaulted on payment of transit rent to eligible slum-dwellers and thereby triggered stop work notices by the SRA based on slum-dwellers’ complaints.
The counsel also argued that Charmi Nirman was added as a co-promoter to the project in December 2017 after a Bombay High Court verdict clarifying the definition of co-promoters under Section 2 (zk) of Real Estate (Regulation and development) Act (RERA).
Joy and Sayla stated that they had already completed construction of Callista up to 13th floor in October 2018, but Charmi Nirman and the architect were refusing to complete their obligations and apply for part OC.
Meanwhile, Charmi Nirman had suggested that Lathiyas were home-buyers from the sale component and, hence, it had no contract with them while alleging that their complaint was a collusive complaint at the behest of Joy and Sayla Realtors. Charmi Nirman also maintained that MahaRERA has allowed Callista’s date of possession to be revised to 30 December 2020, which is still three months away and, hence, the complaint for delayed possession is premature.
MahaRERA member Dr Vijay Satbir Singh observed that irrespective of the internal disputes between the two developers, the slum-dwellers of the rehab component and the home-buyers of the sale components should not be left in lurch by both developers.
The SRA executive engineer was also part of the final online hearing and agreed to consider the grant of OC if the architect Ajit Rane sought it.
MahaRERA has now directed Charmi Nirman to mandate its architect to obtain the OC from the SRA while directing the SRA to consider it within 30 days of the application.
