Mumbai News: MahaRERA Orders Rare Townships To Refund ₹1.89 Crore With Interest To Flat Buyers Over Delayed Ghatkopar Project

Mumbai: The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has directed Rare Townships Private Limited, a Ghatkopar-based developer, to refund two flat buyers, Mitul Harakchand Gada and Vinal Gada, the full amount they paid for their apartments in the North Sea Heights (A1) project.

Apart from the principal amount, the developer has also been ordered to pay interest at the rate of the State Bank of India’s highest Marginal Cost Lending Rate (MCLR) plus 2%, as prescribed under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, from the date of payments until actual realization.

Flats Booked, But Possession Never Delivered

The complainant couple had initially booked Flat No. 705 in 2012 after assurances from the developer’s sales representatives. A first payment of Rs 5 lakh was made on December 31, 2012. Later, through a registered agreement for sale dated November 2, 2015, the booking was shifted to Flats No. 1503 and 1504.

The developer had promised possession by December 31, 2018. However, even years later, the flats remained incomplete, with construction at a standstill and municipal approvals not in place. By then, the couple had paid a total of Rs 1.89 crore, including charges and taxes. Aggrieved by the delay, they approached MahaRERA seeking a refund with interest and compensation.

Developer’s Defence Rejected by MahaRERA

Rare Townships argued that the complaints were not maintainable due to an arbitration clause in the agreement signed before RERA came into force. The developer claimed the complainants defaulted on payments, and that 85% of the project was completed with statutory approvals.

It further cited financial stress caused by over 60% of allottees defaulting, invoking force majeure in 2019 to extend possession deadlines. The developer maintained that compelling it to refund would divert funds and affect genuine allottees.

Rejecting these arguments, MahaRERA observed: “Even on the extended date, the project was incomplete, and possession was not handed over to the complainants. It shows that the respondent has violated the provisions of Section 18 of RERA. Hence, the complainants are entitled to seek refund along with interest.”

Advocate Welcomes RERA Ruling

The authority ruled that the builder’s justifications for delay had “no legal substance” since construction was still not complete.

Also Watch:

Consumer Connect: 'Look At MahaRERA Portal For Homebuying Guidelines,' Says Expert

Advocate Mithil Sampat, appearing for the complainants, told FPJ: “The Honourable RERA authorities have rightly held that there is no legal substance in the reasons for delay given by the builder.”

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/