'Blatant Disregard of Law': MahaRERA Penalises Keyana Estate Over Delay In Mumbai Project

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has imposed a penalty of ₹2 lakh on developer Keyana Estate LLP for delaying possession of flats in its Kalpataru Radiance D project in Mumbai and for raising technical objections to the maintainability of homebuyers' complaints.

The Authority, led by Chairperson Manoj Saunik, held the developer liable under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and criticised it for exhibiting what it described as a “blatant disregard to the law and fair business practices”.

As a result, the developer was directed to pay interest for delayed possession from January 1, 2020 until the actual date of handing over of two flats in the Kalpataru Radiance D project.

The ruling came in complaints filed by Latha Jayesh Chaudhary and Jayesh Anand Chaudhary, the allottees in the project.

The flats were booked under registered agreements for sale dated February 18, 2017, which fixed June 30, 2018 as the original date for handing over possession. This timeline was later revised by mutual consent to December 2019.

Even after the project received a full occupancy certificate on April 10, 2023, possession of the complainants' flats was offered only much later, through a possession letter dated October 25, 2024.

The homebuyers alleged that the developer failed to meet both the possession schedule and the agreed compensation commitments, despite them having paid substantial amounts of over Rs. 2.05 crore and Rs. 2.11 crore respectively. They therefore sought interest for delayed possession under Section 18 of the Act.

The developer argued that the complaints were not maintainable as they were filed about 1.8 years after the issuance of the occupation certificate. It cited disputes between MHADA and GACPL as well as related proceedings before the Bombay High Court and the COVID-19 pandemic as reasons for the delay.

While MahaRERA noted that, on a mere technicality, the complaints were liable to be dismissed as not maintainable, it clarified that cases must be examined and decided based on the conduct of the parties and not solely on procedural objections.

Emphasising that the provision governing delayed possession is absolute, the Authority observed that “such acts if condoned on grounds of legal technicalities will defeat the noble objective of this beneficial legislation”.

The Authority also noted that the developer attempted to invoke arbitration 14 months after receiving the occupation certificate, which it criticised as a “wanton misuse of the promoter's position of strength vis-a-vis the allottee”.

Accordingly, MahaRERA allowed the complaints and directed Keyana Estate LLP to pay interest to the homebuyers from January 1, 2020 until possession was actually handed over.

It also held that the developer had withheld possession even after completion and misused its dominant position, and therefore directed it to deposit a penalty of Rs. 2 lakh.

For Complainants: Advocate Manish Gala

For Respondent: Advocate Suneet Kr Tyagi