#RERA

The Bombay High Court ruled that the RERA Appellate Tribunal cannot adjudicate merits when the Regulatory Authority dismissed a complaint on maintainability grounds without a merits hearing. Doing so would deprive parties of their statutory right to first-instance adjudication and a subsequent appeal. The Tribunal must remand the matter to the Authority for fresh merits determination.

The Calcutta High Court held that arbitral tribunals may grant Section 17 interim measures without first deciding Section 16 jurisdictional objections, treating such orders as neutral fact finding steps to preserve the status quo and enable relief in arbitration.

Omaxe Ltd’s petition under Section 37(1)(c) was dismissed, leaving the arbitral award that orders the builder to pay compensation for delayed possession, with 15% interest, untouched. The ruling clarifies that courts may intervene only for evident misconduct or jurisdictional error, not merely to alter award amounts. Homebuyers and developers in builder-buyer agreements are directly impacted.

The Allahabad High Court has mandated that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority must conclude registration proceedings initiated via notice under Section 59 of RERA, 2016, within three months of its production. This enforces a strict statutory deadline, protecting homebuyers from indefinite delays and reinforcing RERA’s obligation to act with urgency, not discretion.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that basement construction area does not count toward permissible ground coverage under the MP Bhumi Vikas Rules, 2012, invalidating arbitrary stoppage orders against developers. This clarifies a critical ambiguity for real estate builders across Madhya Pradesh, enabling more efficient land use without violating density norms.

Bombay High Court dismisses a developer's appeal for condonation of an 851-day delay under RERA, ruling that 'sufficient cause' mandates reasonable diligence beyond claims of inadvertence or resource constraints. The judgment reinforces that RERA appeals demand strict compliance with timelines, impacting real estate litigants seeking delay condonation.

NCDRC rules that developers cannot offer possession under RERA without a valid Occupancy Certificate, capping delay compensation at the date of an invalid OC offer. The ruling reinforces compliance with revised timelines and protects homebuyers from arbitrary charges imposed by developers.

NCLAT rules that under RERA, secured creditors' claims in corporate insolvency resolution processes (CIRP) are restricted to unsold units only, prioritizing homebuyers' rights. NOIDA's statutory dues are recognized as secured claims under registered lease deeds, impacting real estate insolvency proceedings.

The Bombay High Court has ruled that developers cannot bypass MahaRERA’s statutory appeal mechanism by filing writ petitions challenging recovery orders under Section 40 of RERA. This reinforces that specialized tribunals like RERA are the exclusive forum for resolving real estate disputes, preserving legislative intent and preventing forum shopping by promoters.

The NCLAT has clarified that operational creditors, even with admitted claims under the IBC, cannot invoke RERA’s statutory trust provisions to extract funds from the project’s 70% escrow account during corporate insolvency. This upholds the hierarchy of the IBC framework, ensuring resolution plans - not piecemeal claims - govern asset distribution, protecting homebuyers and the integrity of the insolvency process.

NCLAT rules that unsold inventory in a RERA-registered project must be included in the corporate debtor’s asset pool during CIRP, even if the collaboration agreement is disputed or non-enforceable. This holding strengthens creditor claims and prevents developers from shielding project assets from insolvency proceedings.

Allahabad High Court rules that a lessee without the right to sell units does not qualify as a 'promoter' under RERA, as the statutory definition mandates the ability to transfer or sell units. The judgment clarifies that leasehold arrangements lacking sale rights fall outside RERA's registration requirements, impacting real estate developers and regulatory authorities.

Bombay High Court reaffirms that mortgages created before RERA's enactment remain immune to state auction proceedings under the Act, unless fraud or collusion is proven. The ruling grants interim protection to secured creditors, preventing state authorities from auctioning properties already mortgaged prior to RERA's implementation, reinforcing the supremacy of pre-existing security interests.

Bombay High Court rules that a successor developer assuming project obligations via a development agreement is bound by RERA, 2016 to honor allotment commitments to buyers, even without direct contractual privity. The judgment reinforces RERA’s consumer protection mandate, ensuring buyers retain rights against subsequent developers.

ITAT Delhi rules that RERA-mandated compensation for delayed possession constitutes a transfer of capital asset, not interest income, and must be taxed as long-term capital gains. This precedent clarifies tax treatment for homebuyers receiving compensation under RERA, impacting real estate transactions and tax filings.