Routine Business, Approval Delays Not Force Majeure For Delayed Home Possession: Maharashtra RERA

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has recently ruled that a promoter cannot justify delaying possession of a home by citing routine business and regulatory issues.

These include labour shortages, supply chain disruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic, revised building plans, additional FSI, suspension of FSI/TDR approvals, and proposed road widening.

Partly allowing a complaint by two Pune homebuyers, the Authority directed Rejoice Homes LLP and its co-promoters to pay interest at SBI MCLR plus 2% on the actual amount paid towards the flat consideration, which the homebuyers said was about ₹34.98 lakh. The interest will run from January 1, 2025 until possession is offered with an Occupation Certificate (OC).

MahaRERA Member Mahesh Pathak passed the order on July 6, 2026.

"Mere submission of the respondent of shortage of labour, disruption of the supply chain or general difficulties during the pandemic are not sufficient to claim protection under Section 6 of the RERA. Further, as far as the other reasons cited by the promoter for the said delay, such as revised building plans, additional FSI, suspension of FSI/TDR approvals, redesign of the said project and the proposed road widening by PMC, are part of the normal process of project development. However, these are business and regulatory issues which every promoter is expected to deal with. Hence, they do not amount to force majeure under Section 6 of the RERA."

The dispute arose from the purchase of Flat No. 1102 in Wing C of the "Karma Rejoice" project at Undri, Pune. Under a registered agreement for sale dated September 21, 2023, the Galgates agreed to purchase the flat for ₹39 lakh and paid ₹34.98 lakh towards the consideration.

Rejoice Homes LLP agreed to hand over possession by June 30, 2024, with a six-month grace period till December 31, 2024.

When possession was not handed over despite a legal notice dated July 26, 2025, the homebuyers approached RERA on December 13, 2025 by filing a complaint under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, seeking possession along with interest and compensation under Section 18.

Rejoice Homes LLP attributed the delay to the COVID-19 pandemic, labour shortages, supply chain disruptions, suspension of FSI/TDR approvals, revised building plans approved on August 27, 2024, and the Pune Municipal Corporation's proposed road widening.

It contended that construction was complete, all necessary NOCs had been obtained and only the Occupation Certificate remained.

The Galgates argued that the agreement was executed after the pandemic and that the promoter had failed to honour the agreed possession date.

Maharashtra RERA held that the promoter had failed to produce any documentary evidence showing that these circumstances actually prevented timely completion of the project. It observed that, since the agreement was executed after the pandemic, the promoter could claim only the benefit of the extension already granted by RERA during the pandemic period and could not rely on COVID-19 to justify the delay.

The Authority further held that obtaining statutory approvals in time is the promoter's obligation under RERA and that routine business and regulatory issues cannot amount to force majeure.

Holding that the promoter had violated Section 18, it directed payment of interest at SBI MCLR plus 2% on ₹34.98 lakh paid towards the flat consideration from January 1, 2025 until possession is offered with the Occupation Certificate.

It rejected the claim for compensation since the homebuyers chose to remain in the project.

The Authority further directed that the interest shall be paid after the Occupation Certificate is obtained, with the promoter entitled to adjust any outstanding dues against the interest payable. If the interest payable exceeds the outstanding dues, the promoter shall not raise any further demand towards those dues.

For Complainants (Anish Charudatta Galgate and Pallavi Anish Galgate): Appeared in person.

For Respondents (Rejoice Homes LLP, Kaluram Arjun Abnave and Ajinkya Kaluram Abnave): Advocate Kaustubh Kandale.