BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
MUMBAI
Hearing held through Hybrid mode

COMPLAINT NO. : CC12501913

1. Sunil Gade

2. Poonam Gade
…COMPLAINANTS
Vs
STK CORPORATION
…RESPONDENT

MahaRERA Project registration No. P51700017947


INTERIM ORDER

21. 05.2026
(Date of Hearing: 02/03/2026)

Coram: Shri. Ravindra Deshpande, Member 2 MahaRERA

Complainants In person a/w. Adv. Nilofer Shaikh
Adv. Akanksha Anand for the Respondent

1. The Complainants have filed the present application for amendment in the
complaint.

2. The brief facts of the application are as follows:
The Complainants have filed the complaint alleging delay in possession of Flat
No. B/1101, 11th Floor, B-Wing, in the project “Kukreja Classic”, Sanpada,
Navi Mumbai, along with Car Parking No. 85. The Complainant have
purchased the flat on 25th October 2020 and executed a registered Agreement
for Sale on 25.11.2020 for a total consideration of Rs.1,75,61,667/-. As per the
Agreement for Sale, possession was to be handed over by 31.10.2023. The
Complainants paid Rs.98,78,324/-, being more than 56% of the agreed
consideration. However, the Respondent failed to hand over possession within
the stipulated period, and therefore, the Complainants sought relief under
Section 18 of the Act for delayed possession and compensation.

3. The complainants submitted that the Respondent is involved in serious internal
family disputes concerning the present project, which are pending before the
Competent Authority, resulting in complete stoppage of project activities. A
public notice displayed at the project site restrains any sale, transfer, or lease
transactions, indicating the Respondent’s inability to exercise clear control over
the project. The Complainants submit that the Respondent’s internal disputes
cannot justify delay in possession, as Sections 11 and 18 of the Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 mandate timely completion and
delivery of possession. The Complainants further state that construction have
remained stalled for the past four years with no visible progress, creating
serious apprehension regarding completion of the project. The Complainants
have already paid Rs.98,78,329/-, being more than 56% of the total
consideration, which remains blocked due to the Respondent’s failure to fulfil
its contractual and statutory obligations. Despite repeated requests, the
Respondent have failed to provide any concrete timeline for completion or
possession, thereby violating Sections 11, 18, and 19(4) of the Act.

4. The complainants further submitted the prayers are to be amended as follows
:
i.
“That this Hon'ble Authority be pleased to direct the Respondent, under
Section 18 of the Act and in accordance with the Agreement for Sale, to pay
interest for every month of delay commencing from the agreed possession date
(31.10.2023 until the actual handing over of possession of the subject flat along
with all promised amenities, at the rate prescribed under the Act, calculated on
the total amount paid by the Complainants.
ii.
Alternatively, the delay interest accrued may be permitted to be set off or
adjusted against the outstanding consideration payable by the Complainants;
and any excess amount, after such adjustment, be refunded forthwith in a single
instalment.
iii.
That this Hon'ble Authority may be pleased to direct the Respondent to
immediately resume construction, complete the pending works, obtain all

requisite permissions -and approvals from the concerned authorities, and hand
over peaceful possession of the subject flat within a time-bound schedule.
iv.
That this Hon'ble Authority be pleased to direct immediate interim
disbursement of delay interest on the total amount paid by the Complainants,
in order to mitigate ongoing financial hardship caused due to prolonged and
unjustified delay.
v.
That the cost of this complaint and amendment application of (Rupees Fifty
Thousand Only) be awarded in favour of the Complainants.
vi.
That the Complainants may be permitted to file additional submissions, sur-
rejoinders, or supporting documents as may be required, with the leave of this
Hon'ble Authority.
vii.
Any other order(s) or relief(s) this Hon'ble Authority deems fit and proper in
the interest of justice may also be granted.”

5. The complainants submitted that the present amendment application is filed
without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties and that the
proposed amendment neither changes the nature of the
complaint nor
causes
any prejudice to the Respondent.

6. The other side have not filed reply/say to the application.

7. While deciding the application it is necessary to consider that due to proposed
amendment the nature of the proceeding should not be changed. It is also
necessary to allow the amendment application to decide the dispute between
the parties effectively. It is expected that court should be liberal while allowing
the amendment application. The merits of the proposed amendment should not
be considered while deciding the amendment application. Due to proposed
amendment the nature of the proceeding is not going to be changed and in
order to decide the case on merits and considering the fact that the other side
is having opportunity to upload the amended reply, in my opinion, the
application deserves to be allowed. Hence, I pass following order:

O R D E R

1. The application is allowed.

2. The complainant is permitted to amend the complaint within four corners of
this application.

3. The complainant is directed to upload the amended complaint on MahaRERA
website immediately within 15 days of this order.


Date: 21.05.2026


(Ravindra Deshpande)
Member-2, MahaRERA
RAVINDRA
PADMAKARA
O DESHPANDE
Digitally signed by
RAVINDRA PADMAKARAO
DESHPANDE
Date: 2026.05.21 11:53:17
+05'30'