MahaRERA rejects Lodha's protest against the Mumbai project known as New Cuffe Parade

 MahaRERA rejects Lodha's protest against the Mumbai project known as New Cuffe Parade

MahaRERA rejects Lodha's protest against the Mumbai project known as New Cuffe Parade

MahaRERA states in a real estate-related dispute pertaining to Mumbai that modifications and adjustments made by the builder outside of the registered defined area are outside of our jurisdiction.

The developer allegedly began work on the open space without the consent of the two-thirds majority of the house purchasers, according to the home buyer's allegations.

According to the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MaHARERA), monitoring development outside of the bounds of a registered project is not required under RERA. According to MahaRERA, there is no clause in Section 14(2) of RERA that requires the developer to get consent from two-thirds of the allottees before expanding their project's boundaries.

The case against Macrotech Developers, also referred to as Lodha, the listed developer for the New Cuffe Parade project in Mumbai's Wadala neighborhood, was dismissed by MahaRERA along with the aforementioned ruling. The buyer in this instance, Lodha, lives in the Dioro building, which is a component of the 'New Cuffe Parade' project.

The developer allegedly began work on the open space without the consent of the two-thirds majority of the house purchasers, according to the home buyer's allegations.

What does RERA Section 14(2) mean?

According to Section 14(2) of the RERA Act, important modifications, such as those to the project's plan, building specifications, or common areas, cannot be made without the two-thirds of the people's prior written permission. According to several earlier MahaRERA allottee rulings, the Act establishes prerequisites that, if met, permit major modifications.

Example

For a total of Rs 3.89 crore, the complainant (property buyer) bought a unit on the 32nd level of the Lodha Deoro building in November 2022.

The buyer informed MahaRERA that the huge layout design of the apartment he had bought had room for an open area and a club house.

The purchaser of the property claimed that the developers were building on the open area without the purchasers' permission. Due to the fact that the development will obstruct his view and lower the value of his home, the MahaRERA complaint requested a halt on the project.

The reasoning of developers

The developers informed MahaRERA that they are moving on with the construction work with all necessary permits and clearances and that they have obtained a separate RERA number (RERA registration) for the new build. The fact that the house buyer's selling agreement made it apparent that the development would take place gradually pleased the developers.

The developers went on to state that all of the amenities promised to the house buyer are being supplied and have not been lowered in any manner. He claimed that neither the common spaces nor the facilities would be affected by the construction of the new tower, nor would the clubhouse area—a communal open space on the bigger property—be reduced.

The house buyer's argument that prior approval was needed for the under-construction tower or any other building on the huge property is untrue, as stated in clause 5.3 of the agreement. The developers additionally contended that they are not required by statute to get the approval of two-thirds of the allottees under Section 14 of the aforementioned Act.

Order of Maharera

RERA does not have the jurisdiction to oversee construction outside of the parameters of a specific registered project, according to MahaRERA's ruling. When work extends beyond the area marked at the time of registration under Section 4(2) of RERA, there is no clause in Section 14(2) of RERA requiring the developer to get permission from two-thirds of the allottees. As.

According to MahaRERA, the complaint did not provide any documentation proving that the respondent's (developer's) building project violated any RERA regulations.

It is evident from this that RERA and local planning bodies function in two very distinct fields. The application and power of RERA are insufficient to ensure the enforcement of development control (DC) regulations. According to an order dated December 8, 2023, MahaRERA Chairman Ajoy Mehta said that the local planning authority should be contacted over any suspected infractions of construction laws. Mehta dismissed the grievance based on these arguments.

Macrotech Developers has been contacted via email on the MahaRERA order, and their answer is anticipated.