SC asks Bom­bay HC to de­cide on cases chal­leng­ing RERA

Hindustan Times (Chandigarh) - Estates - - FRONT PAGE -

New Delhi, Sep 4 (IANS) The Supreme Court on Mon­day asked the Bom­bay High Court to de­cide on chal­lenge to pro­vi­sions of the new real es­tate law which man­dates builders to regis­ter their on­go­ing projects with the Real Es­tate Reg­u­la­tory Au­thor­ity (RERA).

The bench of Jus­tice Arun Mishra and Jus­tice Mo­han M. Shanta nagoud ar asked the other high courts where sim­i­lar chal­lenges to the pro­vi­sions of the Real Es­tate (Reg­u­la­tion and De­vel­op­ment) Act, 2016, were pend­ing with them to await the out­come of the hear­ing by the Bom­bay High Court. It gave the Bom­bay high court two months' time to de­cide on the pe­ti­tion by real es­tate builder and any sim­i­lar mat­ter pend­ing be­fore it.

The court or­der cameo na pe­ti­tion by the cen­tral gov­ern­ment seek­ing the trans­fer of 20 cases chal­leng­ing the pro­vi­sions of the 2016 law pend­ing be­fore var­i­ous high courts to it­self.

At the out­set of the hear­ing, as At­tor­ney G en eral KKVenug opal ad­dressed the court, Jus­tice Mis hr a asked why shouldn' t they ask one of the high courts to hear all the pe­ti­tion sand de­cide on the mat­ter in­stead of mak­ing ev­ery one to travel to Delhi.

The bench con­sid­ered the op­tion of ask­ing Bom­bay, Kar­nataka and Delhi High Courts but even­tu­ally it was agreed to give it to the Bom­bay High Court which was moved first chal­leng­ing the act

As the court asked what was the ob­jec­tive of the pro­vi­sion of the law reg­u­lat­ing the real es­tate that have been chal­lenged by the builders and devel­op­ers, the At­tor­ney Gen­eral said that builders were mis-u ti li sing the money taken from the home buy­ers and then leav­ing the projects half way. On be­ing asked what was the chal­lenge be­fore the High Courts, Venugopal said is their re­sis­tance to the pro­vi­sion man­dat­ing the reg­is­tra­tion of on­go­ing projects with the RERA.

The Cen­tral gov­ern­ment had told the apex court that the law reg­u­lat­ing the real es­tate was aimed to curb de­lays in project com­ple­tion, di­ver­sion of funds col­lected from buy­ers, one-sided con­tracts due to power a sym­me­try, reneg­ing on con­trac­tual com­mit­ments by both the devel­op­ers and buy­ers, and the con­straints in fi­nanc­ing and in­vest­ment op­tions avail­able to the sec­tor thus af­fect­ing its long term growth.

It said prior to this law, the op­er­a­tions were opaque with buy­ers of res­i­den­tial units or com­mer­cial spa­ces were un­able to pro cure com­plete in­for­ma­tion or en­force ac­count­abil­ity against the builders and devel­op­ers.

The HCs have been moved by var­i­ous pro­mot­ers - builders or devel­op­ers, pro­mot­ers as­so­ci­a­tion and co-op­er­a­tive so­ci­eties de­vel­op­ing real es­tate projects for the sale of res­i­den­tial flats, row­houses, and the own­ers of bun­ga­lows and plots, chal­lenged var­i­ous pro­vi­sions of the Act

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.