━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 5
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA
REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, MUMBAI
Virtual Hearing held through video conference as per
MahaRERA Circular No.: 27/2020

RESTORATION APPLICATION
IN
NON-COMPLIANCE APPLICATION
IN

COMPLAINT NO. CC006000000100300


M/S. B.K. FINANCE CORPORATION PVT. LTD.
…COMPLAINANT

VS

1. M/S. KAVYA MIRA REALTY
A PARTNERSHIP FIRM
THROUGH ITS PARTNERS

2. MR. MANSUKHLAL CHATRUBHUJ VORA

3. MR. JIGNESH MANSUKHLAL VORA

4. MR. NIMESH MANSUKHLAL VORA

5. MRS. KAJAL NIMISH VORA

6. MR. NAVINCHANDRA T. MEHTA


…RESPONDENT/S


MAHARERA PROJECT REGISTRATION NO. P51700010584


INTERIM ORDER


February 12th, 2025
(Date of hearing – 28.11.2024 matter was reserved for order)


Coram: Manoj Saunik, Chairperson, MahaRERA

Advocate Satish N. Notani present for complainant.
None present for respondents.

1)
The complainant has filed the present application for restoration of non-
compliance application and to set aside the order dated 4th July 2023 in the above-
mentioned complaint.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 5
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

2)
The original complaint CC00600000010300 was filed on 25.07.2019 under Section
18 of the Act, seeking relief against the respondents for the delayed handover of
possession along with the interest. The authority passed the

FINAL ORDER

dated

14. 12.2021 directing the respondents to pay the interest for the delay caused in
handover the possession from 01.02.2015 at rate as prescribed under Rule 18 of
the Maharashtra Real estate (Regulation and Development) Rule 2017 up to the
handover of possession with the occupancy certificate.

3)
Thereafter, the complainant filed the non-compliance application dated

12. 04.2022 seeking execution of the

FINAL ORDER

dated 14.12.2021. The non-
compliance application was heard by the then Secretary, MahaRERA on

04. 07.2023 and the following observation was recorded: -
“(6) In view of the above since a civil suit before the Thane district court and a
case against dishonoured cheque under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument
Act, has been filed by the complainant, the present application cannot be
decided. Further the complainant has remained absent for the said hearing even
though the notice of hearing was duly served upon it. It shows that the
complainant is not inclined to pursue the present application.
(7) Consequently, the present application of non-compliance stands disposed
of.”

4)
The restoration application was heard by the authority on 28.11.2024 wherein the
following roznama was recorded: -
“The complainant is present; the respondent is absent.
This is the third consecutive absence of the respondent. The matter is heard ex -parte.
The matter is reserved for orders. “

5)
The brief facts and submissions of the complainant are as follow:
a) That the present restoration application is filed by the complainant to set aside
the order dated 04.07.2023 and to restore the non-compliance application.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 5
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

b) That the original complaint CC006000000100300 was filed by the complainant
under section 18 of the Act, seeking possession with the occupancy certificate
and interest for delay in handover of possession. The authority passed order
dated 14.12.2021 and directed the respondent to pay the interest for the delay
caused in handover the possession from 01.02.2015 at rate as prescribed under
Rule 18 of the Maharashtra Real estate (Regulation and Development) Rule
2017 up to the handover of possession with the occupancy certificate and the
interest up to 31.02.2022 should be paid in one instalment by 31.03.2022.
Subsequently, the interest shall be payable on or before the 5th of every
subsequent month. The authority also directed the respondent to refund the
balance amount as per the cancellation deed dated 03.04.2017 with respect to
office No. 4 in B wing with interest from 01.05.2017 onwards till the realisation
of the amount.
c) That since the respondent did not comply with the order dated 14.12.2021, the
complainant filed the non-compliance application. Simultaneously, the
complainant also filed the Regular Civil Suit No. 893 of 2022 before the City
Civil Junior Division at Thane seeking compliance of statutory obligation under
the Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of
Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 to handover the
possession, temporary and permanent injunction and to award the
compensation.
d) That the non-compliance application was listed on 31.01.2023 before the
Hon’ble Secretary MahaRERA where both the parties appeared. The Hon’ble
Secretary directed the respondent to get the project registration extended by
making an appropriate application. The respondent is also granted time to file
the reply to the non-compliance application within a period of 15 days.
However, the respondent has not filed any reply to the non-compliance
application.
e) That the complainants, being based in Akola face difficulties in frequently
travelling before the authority. That even the advocate engaged is based at
Ulhasnagar and generally practicing in Thane, Kalyan courts and not regularly

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 4 of 5
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

in MahaRERA. Further, that the complainant along with his advocate on

28. 11.2023 personally visited the MahaRERA office to inquire about the non-
compliance application and was informed by the counselling officer that the
non- compliance application had been disposed of.
f) That the complainant was unable to access the complaint due technical issues
online. The complainant also submits that he was not having information or
knowledge pertaining to the hearing of the non-compliance application.
g) That the complainant was not having any deliberate or wilful intension to
remain absent before the authority.

6) The respondent failed to appear for the hearings in the present matter, and thus,
the authority proceeded ex-parte in this matter.

7) From the above submission of the complainant, the authority observes that the
complainant was not deliberately absent but faced genuine difficulties in accessing
the hearing scheduled on 04.07.2023 before the then Secretary, MahaRERA.
Consequently, the non-compliance application was disposed with directions
reproduced herein para no. 3 above.

8) Given the ex parte nature of the proceedings, the complainant’s right to seek
enforcement of the

FINAL ORDER

cannot be denied solely on procedural ground.

9) The Adjudicating Officer, MahaRERA is directed to hear the non-compliance
application and pass appropriate order. The non-compliance application in the
captioned complaint stands transferred to the Adjudicating Officer, MahaRERA.

10) The Registry, MahaRERA is directed to transfer the non-compliance application in
the captioned complaint to appropriate bench of Adjudicating Officer,
MahaRERA.

━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 5 of 5
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

11) Accordingly, the present restoration application along with application for
condonation of delay, is allowed and hereby disposed with the directions
hereinabove.

12) No order as to costs.


Manoj Saunik


Chairperson, MahaRERA


MANOJ
SAUNIK
Digitally signed by
MANOJ SAUNIK
Date: 2025.02.12
13:30:52 +05'30'