RWA-Member Maintenance Disputes Governed By Bye-Laws, Not RERA Act: Punjab RERA
The Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) held on 14 August that disputes concerning recovery of maintenance charges between a Residents Welfare Association (RWA) and its members do not fall within the scope of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Such disputes concern the relationship between an association and its members and are governed by the association's registered bye-laws and applicable laws.
Chairman Rakesh Kumar Goyal dismissed a complaint filed by Leafstone Residents Welfare Association seeking recovery of unpaid maintenance dues from two residents, holding that the Authority could adjudicate disputes under the RERA Act only where they concerned promoters, allottees or real estate agents. The Authority observed:
“Maintenance charges paid in accordance with maintenance and service agreement are contractual in nature and paid in lieu of services provided by service provider. Therefore, the case of the complainant is not covered under any provision of RERD Act, 2016 or rules made thereunder. In this case, it is not within power of this authority to adjudicate the issues between a Residents Welfare Association and its members who are not promoter. The RERD Act, 2016 is applicable only inter-se issues relating to promoters, allottees and real estate agents.”
The dispute arose from the Leafstone Apartments project in Zirakpur, developed by M.D. Builders Pvt. Ltd. Leafstone Residents Welfare Association, which was registered on 27 September 2022 under the Punjab Apartment Ownership Rules, 1995, managed the common services and amenities at the residential complex. According to the Association, Daizy Dass and Amit Dass, residents of Flat No. 307-A, had failed to pay maintenance charges despite availing the services provided by the Association. It claimed that it had issued repeated demand notices and reminders to the residents.
The Association approached the Punjab RERA on 22 October 2024 under Section 31 read with Section 40(1) of the RERA Act, seeking recovery of Rs. 83,797 towards maintenance dues with interest, Rs. 15,000 towards litigation costs and certain property documents relating to the flat.
On 27 May 2025, the Authority questioned whether an RWA could maintain a claim for recovery of maintenance charges against its members under the RERA Act. It directed the Association to place its rules and regulations on record and explain the legal basis for the complaint.
The Association submitted that it was duly registered and responsible for providing common services for which its members were required to pay maintenance charges. Daizy Dass and Amit Dass did not appear despite service of notices.
The Authority found that the Association had failed to establish any violation of the RERA Act or the rules and regulations framed under it. It noted that Section 31 provides a remedy for violations of the Act by promoters, allottees or real estate agents, whereas the present dispute concerned an association and its members.
It clarified that maintenance charges levied by a duly registered RWA may nevertheless remain valid, binding and enforceable where they are imposed under its bye-laws, memorandum or other governing framework. A member cannot refuse to pay valid dues, and an Association can initiate appropriate recovery proceedings after following due process.
Further, the Authority held that maintenance charges payable under a maintenance and service agreement constitute contractual payments made in return for services provided. Recovery of such contractual dues, however, must be pursued under the Association's registered bye-laws and applicable association laws rather than under the RERA Act. It observed:
“The proper and legal form for these disputes is the Authority which has registered the Resident Welfare Association and approved its laws & bye-laws governing the relationship between association & its members. Therefore, the case of the complainant does not come within preview of this authority."
Accordingly, the RERA dismissed the complaint at the threshold, without examining merits, while leaving the parties free to pursue their remedies before the appropriate forum.
Appearances for petitioner (Leafstone Residents Welfare Association): Advocates Sanjeev Sharma, Vishal Singal.