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

Complaint No. CC006000000194332


KALYAN VISHWAKARMA ​
​
​
​
​
...COMPLAINANT
Vs
T BHIMJIYANI (BUILDER)​​
...RESPONDENT

MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51700003862

INTERIM O R D E R
(30/06/2025)
(Date of Hearing: 10/02/2025)

Coram: Shri. Ravindra Deshpande, Member 2, MahaRERA

Adv. Vinay Kadam a/w Adv. Arjun Amanchi is present for Complainant
Adv. Anwar Landge is present for Respondent

1. ​ The Complainant has filed the present application for seeking Amendment in the present
Complaint to change the Project No. from P51700003862 to Project No. P51700004591. Since
the complainant has filed the present Complaint under the Project No. P51700003862 which
is allotted to Project “Neelkanth Woods Bungalow M 66”, 318 Part 1 D, Thane, 400610. It shows
that the Complainant has filed the present complaint in the wrong project whereas dispute
pertains to the project registered as "Neelkanth Woods Olivia". The facts of the amendment
application are as follows:

2. ​ As per the Complainant, the grievance is directed against M/s. T Bhimjyani Realty Pvt.
Ltd., promoter of the project “Neelkanth Woods” situated at Survey No. 312/1A, 316 P, 318
1D, Mullabaug, Manpada, Ghodbunder Road, Thane (W). The Complainant submits that
upon visiting the site, he was issued a booking form (Exhibit A) without any RERA
registration number, reflecting typologies such as 3 Bed Sky Bungalow Regalia and others.

3. ​ According to the Complainant, the booking form did not mention any RERA Registration
Number of the project and the payment was to be made in the name of the Respondent i.e.
M/s. T Bhimjyani Realty Pvt. Ltd. escrow account and such booking was not taken in the
project specific account of the Respondent like Neelkanth Woods Olivia or Neelkanth
Woods Bungalow M66 or Neelkanth Woods Bungalow L 57 or K 52. The Respondent after
receiving the booking amount did not provide, any payment receipt along with the project
details or RERA No. of the booking. The Respondent also did not provide the allotment
letter mentioning the details of the project, flat number and other essential terms and
conditions of the allotment letter including project MahaRERA registration number.

4. ​ Subsequently, the Complainant cancelled the booking due to rejection of his home loan on
eligibility grounds and requested refund. Although the Respondent acknowledged the
refund obligation in writing, no refund has been made to date.

5. ​ The Complainant, having received no response, filed a complaint on 20.10.2020 under
Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 using the project
registration number obtained from online sources. He submits that he chose the registration
number associated with "Neelkanth Woods Bungalow" due to the typology mentioned in
the booking form and general branding of the project, which led to an inadvertent error in
selecting the project registration number.

6. ​ According to the Complainant, the project of the Respondent was popularly known as
“Neelkanth Woods”, and it was not to the specific project such as Olivia, Verathon or
Bungalow. Therefore, the Complainant presuming the quoted registration number as
project registration number went ahead to lodge the Complaint with the MAHARERA
website amidst lockdown situation in the country.

7. ​ According to the Complainant, the Respondent representation in writing acknowledged the
receipt of payment and even acknowledged for the refund of the booking amount within a
period of one month.

8. ​ According to the Complainant, the Respondent in last 4 years never replied to the
Complainant, not came forward in the conciliation opportunity for settlement and after
passing over 4 years, is now coming with a technical defence that actual project registration
number is different from the one quoted by the Complainant represents Respondent’s
intention of cheating and misrepresentation with the conflicting and resembling names
with many prospect homebuyers like of the Complainant and use such money free of cost.

9. ​ According to the Complainant, the project registration number has not been mentioned in
any of the Respondent collaterals for the sole purpose of misrepresentation, cheating hence
only on account of different project registration number of the same promoter, for the
resembling project, the claim of the Complainant should not be rejected, as the claim is on
the Respondent Company and the prayer of the petitioner is against the Respondent
Company, irrespective of project registration of common project under the name and brand
of “Neelkanth Woods”.

10. ​The Respondent has filed a reply and submitted that he is only original Respondent in
the complaint before this authority and he is promoter in the respect of the project. The
Complainant is seeking permission of this court to change the project registration as the
same is not permissible. The Complainant while filling the complaint had to put proper
registration no. as the technical error made at the time of filing of the complaint cannot be
rectified.

11. ​The first and most important criteria to file a complaint is to file any complaint with proper
registration number and then only the complaint will be proceeded but the Complainant
had put the wrong registration number and therefore the aforesaid complaint will be
reflected in some other project and the said technical error cannot be cured and therefore
the present application must be dismissed.

12. ​ I have perused the application filed by the Complainant and the reply of the Respondent
opposing the said application and in my opinion it is seen that the Complainant has
admitted that the complaint was filed in the wrong project number due to clerical errors.
The Complainant itself has marked booking form as exhibit A. Hence, the same cannot be
denied that in the booking form, neither the name of the project nor the MahaRERA project

number is mentioned. Only Unit No., Wing of the building and typology of the unit is
mentioned being Unit no. 2501 in the Wing B, consisting of 3 Bed Sky Bungalow Regalia
Plus, respectively.

13. ​The Complainant also contended that this is a clerical error made by the complainant;
however same cannot be ractified once the complaint has been filed in the MahaRERA
complaint portal by the Complainant. At the time of filing it was the responsibility of the
complainant to submit the correct project no. as it is the most crucial fact for initiation of
any RERA Complaint. As all the Complaints against any project gets reflected in that
Project by way of project no. only. Herein the Complainants complaint is being reflected in
different project due to wrong project no.

14. ​It is seen that once a complaint is filed in a particular project, thereafter there is no option
available to rectify the project number on the MahaRERA website. Therefore, in my
opinion, the present application for amendment cannot be entertained since the complaint
is not filed under the appropriate project number, adjudication of the complaint becomes
difficult.

15. ​ Hence, I pass following order: -

ORDER

1. ​ The application is dismissed.

2. ​ No order as to costs.


(Ravindra Deshpande)
Member-2, MahaRERA
Date :30/06/2025


RAVINDRA
PADMAKARAO
DESHPANDE
Digitally signed by
RAVINDRA PADMAKARAO
DESHPANDE
Date: 2025.06.30 17:17:30
+05'30'