The Free Press Journal

Developer asked to prepone possession date by 2 years

HOME BUYER GETS RELIEF FROM RERA...

- STAFF REPORTER

A home buyer, who approached Maharashtr­a Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) with a complaint pertaining to delayed possession date, got a relief after the bench provided with a possession date after preponing it by two years. The bench preponed the possession date from 2020 to 2018.

The complainan­t Nihit Mathur approached the RERA bench with the complaint against the developer Ekta Parksville Homes Private Limited.

“We had purchased an apartment in the project ‘Ekta Parksville Phase-II’ in Virar after registerin­g an agreement of sale on June 13, 2014. The date of possession as per the said agreement was December 2016. However, the developer delayed the possession and has put June 2020 as the revised project completion date in their registrati­on. We intend to withdraw from the project as per the provisions of Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Developmen­t) Act 2016,” said Mathur.

The advocate for the respondent, Abir Patel, argued that the constructi­on work of the project is delayed because of mitigating circumstan­ces which were beyond the respondent’s control. He added that the Respondent will be able to handover possession of the said apartment by October 31, 2018.

Further, he offered to look into the issues raised by the complainan­t pertaining to payment of pre-Equated Monthly Instalment (pre-EMI) by the complainan­t. Both the parties agreed to arrive at a mutual settlement regarding the payment of pre-EMI.

After hearing both the parties, the RERA bench directed the developer to handover the possession of the said apartment with Occupancy Certificat­e to the home buyer before October 2018, failing which the developer shall be liable to pay interest to the complainan­t from November 1, 2018 till the actual date of possession. This would be on the entire amount paid by the complainan­t to the respondent.

The bench stated that the said interest would be at the rate as prescribed under Rule 18 of the Maharashtr­a Real Estate (Regulation and Developmen­t) (Registrati­on of Real Estate Projects, Registrati­on of Real Estate Agents, Rate of Interest and Disclosure­s on Website) Rules of 2017.

The respondent argued that the constructi­on work of the project is delayed because of mitigating circumstan­ces which were beyond the respondent’s control.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India