LiveLawBiz RERA Cases Weekly Digest: June 15 - June 21, 2026

Bombay High CourtBombay High Court Says Homebuyers Retain Right To Delay Interest Despite Staying With ProjectCase Title : CCI Projects Private Limited v. Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary & Ors.Case Number : Second Appeal No. 479 of 2021Citation: 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 349The Bombay High Court has held that homebuyers who continue with a housing project despite delayed possession do not lose their statutory right to claim interest for the delay.Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh dismissed an appeal filed...

Bombay High Court Says Homebuyers Retain Right To Delay Interest Despite Staying With Project

The Bombay High Court has held that homebuyers who continue with a housing project despite delayed possession do not lose their statutory right to claim interest for the delay. Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh dismissed an appeal filed by CCI Projects Private Limited and upheld a Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal order directing the developer to pay interest to purchasers of an apartment in the Wintergreen building of its Rivali Park project in Mumbai. “The unqualified absolute right of...

Developer Cannot Postpone Conveyance Until Completion Of Entire Layout Development: Bombay High Court

Conveyance of land in favour of a co-operative housing society cannot be postponed until completion of an entire layout development, the Bombay High Court has reiterated while setting aside an order that rejected a society's deemed conveyance application as premature. Justice Sandeep V. Marne observed, “This Court has already held that conveyance cannot be postponed till completion of entire layout development and that land can be conveyed in favour of the Petitioner-Society even before...

LiveLawBiz RERA Cases Weekly Digest: June 7 - June 13, 2026

Nominal IndexRunwal Constructions v. Bharat Shah & Ors. (Connected Matters), 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 310Bangalore Development Authority v. Union of India & Others, 2026 LLBiz HC (KAR) 79N.L. Ravi Shankar & Anr. v. The Registrar, TG Real Estate Regulatory Authority & Ors., 2026 LLBiz REAT (TS) 37M/s. Evos Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. v. Ms. Seema Mohapatra, 2026 LLBiz REAT (OD) 38Sanjeev Kumar Mishra v. Frontier Shelters Pvt. Ltd., 2026 LLBiz RERA (KA) 97Sushila Devi v. M/s Elan Limited, 2026...

Bombay HC Upholds MRT Orders, Holds RERA Appellate Tribunal Not Established By Appointment Of Members Alone

The Bombay High Court on Monday upheld the jurisdiction of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) to hear appeals under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act before the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaREAT) became functional. The court ruled that the appellate tribunal could not be regarded as established merely because its chairperson and members had been appointed. Justice Madhav J. Jamdar dismissed a batch of appeals filed by Runwal Constructions and related...

Karnataka High Court Stays RERA's Applicability To BDA Layouts Based On Pre-Act Land Acquisition

On 3 June, the Karnataka High Court stayed the applicability of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) to residential layouts and housing schemes undertaken by the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) where preliminary land acquisition notifications predated the Act, holding that the issue requires detailed examination. Justice Suraj Govindaraj granted interim relief to the BDA until 6 July 2026 and observed that the outcome of the case could affect allotments made to...

Mandatory RERA Pre-Deposit Cannot Be Diluted By Replacing Statutory Interest Rate With MCLR: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court has recently held that a builder could not be permitted to calculate the mandatory pre-deposit for pursuing a RERA appeal on the basis of the Marginal Cost of Funds-based Lending Rate (MCLR) instead of the State Bank of India's Benchmark Prime Lending Rate plus 2% prescribed under Rule 18 of the Kerala Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2018. The Court observed that such a course would "render Rule 18 a dead letter." A Division Bench of Justice Raja...

RERA Appeal Pre-Deposit Requirement Applies To Refunds, Interest And Compensation, Not Just Penalties: Uttarakhand HC

The Uttarakhand High Court has recently held that the mandatory pre-deposit requirement for entertaining a promoter's appeal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, applies not only in cases involving penalties. It also applies where a promoter challenges directions requiring payment of amounts to allottees, including interest and compensation. A bench of Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay made the observation while dismissing an appeal filed by...

RERA Appeal Remedy Cannot Be Bypassed To Avoid Pre-Deposit Requirement: Punjab and Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently refused to entertain a real estate developer's challenge to a Haryana RERA refund order, holding that a promoter/developer cannot bypass the statutory appellate remedy merely to avoid the pre-deposit requirement. A Division Bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal and Justice Vikas Suri was hearing a petition filed by Advance India Projects Limited against a Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority order directing it to refund over ₹1.02 crore to two allottees in...

Plot Seller With Development Obligations May Fall Within RERA Promoter Definition: Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court has recently held that a company that agrees to develop land, obtain statutory approvals, and secure RERA registration before selling plots could prima facie be treated as a promoter under the real estate law. A Division Bench of Justice Parth Prateem Sahu and Justice Sachin Singh Rajput dismissed an appeal filed by Admire Infrazone Pvt. Ltd. against a Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal order remanding a plot buyer's complaint to RERA for fresh adjudication....

Delhi HC Upholds ₹18 Lakh Refund To Homebuyers, Says Builder Coerced Buyers Into Full And Final Settlement

The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court decree directing R. C. Sood & Co. Developers Pvt. Ltd. to refund ₹18 lakh to Sharad Maheshwari and Vandana Maheshwari. The court found that the developer had illegally cancelled their villa allotment and effectively coerced them into accepting a purported “full and final settlement.” Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed the developer's appeal. She observed that settlements extracted without free consent cannot extinguish a buyer's claim. “It...

LiveLawBiz RERA Cases Weekly Digest: April 20- April 25, 2026

Nominal IndexSanroyal Builders and Contractors Pvt Ltd & Anr v. Divya Balu, 2026 LLBiz HC(KER) 67Vandana Parvez v. IVR Hotels and Resorts Ltd & Ors., 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 104Nidhi Sao v. Greenearth Infraventures Private Limited, 2026 LLBiz HC (CHH) 10M/s Sai Enterprises v. Sangeeta Ravi Punjabi & Ors., 2026 LLBiz HC (BOM) 232Soumya Ranjan Jena v. Priyata Lipsa & Ors., 2026 LLBiz REAT (OD) 25Kamlesh Valji Balsara & Anr. v. M/s Shree Siddhivinayak Infrastructure and Realty &...