Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 1 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
MUMBAI

Complaint No. CC006000000395936

RA Residencies CHS Ltd


... Complainant

Versus

1. RA Associates LLP

2. Sushil Kothari

3. Rajendra Kothari

4. Ashok Kothari

5. Vinay Kothari

6. Vivek Kothari

7. Varun Kothari

8. Chandraprakash Siroya


... Respondents


MahaRERA Project Registration No. P51900001634


Coram: Shri. Mahesh Pathak, Hon’ble Member – I/ MahaRERA

Ld. Adv. Harshad Bhadbade appeared for the complainant.
Ld. Adv. Rubin Vakil appeared for the respondents.


INTERIM ORDER


( Friday, 26th April 2024)

(Through Video Conferencing)


1. The complainant society above named has filed this online complaint before
the MahaRERA on 30-05-2023, seeking following directions from the
MahaRERA to the respondents under the provisions of the Real Estate
(Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’) in
the respondents’ registered project known as “RA RESIDENCES” bearing
MahaRERA registration No. P51900001634 located at Dr. B.A Road, Dadar,
Dist. Mumbai (“said project”):-


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 2 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

“a) to direct forthwith complete the balance work to rectify the defects in the
work and in Fire Fighting machinery or direct the Respondents to deposit Rs.
15 crores with the complainant to carry out necessary repair/replace work.
b) to hand over the entire project to the Society and further injunction from
carrying out any construction work in respect of changed plans.
c)restraining the Respondents from changing the sanctioned plans of
buildings as shown in sanctioned layout which were shown to the respondents
and annexed to their respective agreements and disclosed at the time of
registration of project.
d) injunction restraining the Respondents from Creating 3rd party rights in
respect of commercial building which is being constructed by the respondent
adjoining to the existing society building. e) to direct the Respondents D1) To
provide to the complainant bank lien list of all the Society members, D2)
provide the list of documents more particularly mentioned in their letter dated
06/01/2023 for the purposes of smooth functioning of the Society, D3) to
provide CFO’s provisional Fire NOC, CFO’s Final Fire NOC, Occupation
Certificate and Form-B, D4) to provide exact numbers and location of gates,
parking spaces, guest parking as well as the parking spaces allotment Wing
wise to the Complainant D5) to Install CCTV camera.”

2. This complaint was heard on 26-06-2023 as a first hearing matter, when the
complainant has pressed for interim prayers sought by it at page no. 17 of this
complaint (as the complainant has not uploaded any separate application for
the interim reliefs). The interim reliefs state as under:-
a) “The Respondents be directed to forthwith rectify the defects in the work and in
Fire Fighting machinery or deposit Rs. 15 Crores with the complainant to carry
out necessary repair/replace work of Firefighting machinery and install new
machinery and also to complete the balance work as required under the necessary
specifications.
b) Till the final disposal of the complaint the respondents shall not creat the third -


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 3 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

party rights in respect of Commercial building which is coming up adjoining to the
Complainant’s building known as “RA Residences” of the project.
c) The Respondents be directed to forthwith repair the lifts of the building and or
deposit Rs. 2/- crores with the Complainant for the purpose of necessary repair work
of lift.
d) The Respondents be directed to provide the list of documents and reliefs more
particularly prayed in Prayer clause D1 to D5 ( of main prayers clauses).

3. Accordingly, this matter was heard on the aforesaid interim reliefs on 7-08-
2023, 18-09-2023, 16-10-2023 and finally on 20-11-2023 as per the Standard
Operating Procedure dated 12-06-2020 issued by the MahaRERA for hearing
of complaints through Video Conferencing. Both the parties have been issued
prior intimation of this hearing and they were also informed to file their
written submissions if any. Accordingly, both the parties appeared and made
their respective submissions. The MahaRERA heard the arguments of both the
parties and also perused the available records.

4. After hearing the arguments of both the parties, the following Roznama was
recorded in this complaint on 20-11-2023:-
“First Hearing Matter” Both the parties are present. The matter was kept
today on the issue of interim prayers. The respondent has filed its reply and
the complainant has filed its rejoinder to the said reply of the respondent and
the sur-rejoinder has also been uploaded by the respondent. At the outset, the
complainant has submitted that it is not pressing the issue of an interim
payment of Rs. 15 Cr, however, seeking interim relief for the remaining 3
issues - the prayer for repair of lift, handover of documents and injunction
for non - creation of third party rights specifically about the commercial
building. The respondent in its reply has pointed out that they are ready and
willing to handover the documents and that the lift is already repaired and
there is no issue on these two. On the issue of non creation of third party


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 4 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

rights in the commercial building, the respondent has refuted the contentions
of the complainant in its reply and sur-rejoinder. Accordingly, both the
parties are granted two weeks’ time i.e. till 04-12-2023 to file their written
arguments on the interim prayers. Accordingly, this matter is reserved for
order on the interim prayers suitably after 04-12-2023 based on the
arguments of both the sides as well as reply, rejoinder, sur-rejoinder and
written arguments filed in the complaint. The substantive reliefs claimed in
the complaint would be decided after the said

INTERIM ORDER

is issued and the
matter would be fixed for hearing as per seniority”.

5. Pursuant to the specific directions given by the MahaRERA, both the parties
have uploaded their written arguments on 20-11-2023 and 29-02-2024 on the
record of the MahaRERA. The same are accepted and taken on record in
compliance of principles of natural justice. The MahaRERA has also perused
the available record.

6. It is the case of the complainant that the complainant is a registered Co-Op
Housing Society. The respondent no.1 is a Partnership Company and
respondent no. 2 is the authorised signatory and partner and respondent nos.
3 to 9 are the partners of the respondent no. 1’s partnership company as
mentioned on the MahaRERA website. The complainant further stated that the
respondents have put the life of the members of the complainant in danger. It
claimed that due to the respondents’ various wilful defaults, the entire
building has become dangerous. In addition to this, the respondent- promoter
had continued to illegally utilise the FSI of the complainant for his own use
without the consent of members of the complainant which is in clear violation
of section 14 of the RERA. The respondents had not properly carried out the
work of firefighting system, the lift work was also in shambles, thus,
threatening the life of members of the complainant. Further, the respondent-


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 5 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

promoter failed to deliver the possession on time. The members of the
complainant had time and again agitated with the respondents regarding
incomplete work of the said project. At the time of booking of the flats, the
respondent had promised various things to members of the complainant.
Initial completion date was 30-06-2018 as per RERA declaration in 2017;
brochure mentioned that state of the art global vendors were hired, colour of
the building and all details were given in the brochure, various amenities were
promised in the brochure, full ground floor was for guest parking as per initial
BMC plan, safety features like gas detection etc were mentioned, IT park, Plan
as per new DCR with IT part @ 40000 square feet area, Gym on 41st floor in
both the wings was documented in the plan of the said project; entire back side
of both wings was an elaborate glass façade and OC of full residential building
was envisaged. However, nothing of the above was ever completed by the
respondents till date which is in violation of section 12 of the RERA. The
respondents had a valid sanctioned plan in the year 2017 and based on the said
plan they had sold various apartments / unit to the complainant. However,
the respondents unilaterally had changed the sanctioned plan without the
consent of the complainant society and hence violated section 14 of the RERA.
The 41st floor gym area was converted into a 1 BHK flat and the same flat has
been numbered as 4102 with 466 square feet area. The flat in B wing was sold
and registered by the builder on 15-05-2023. It was further submitted by the
complainant that the respondents have not only unilaterally changed the plan
but also made major changes which were: i) Extra parking space created by
encroaching the mandatory guest parking that was to be provided as the said
project was as per DP 1991 that had provision for 25 % guest parking as per
the plans; ii) The IT space was converted into the pure commercial space and
the RG area open to ground was encroached, extra FSI as per DP 2034 was
utilised to build more space - earlier MOFA carpet of full IT park was approx.
39000 square feet and current RERA carpet of 80000 square feet was created


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 6 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

with illegal user change; iii) RG space from open to ground was partially
shifted to the 5th floor podium; iv) All duplex flats were given extra space by
encroaching on the lower floor open area; v) Storerooms were created on all
the refugee floors which had 4 BHKS and have been illegally sold; vi)
encroachment and illegal construction of the office premises on the ground
floor of the building which was sold to a 3rd party. Further, the respondents
delayed the formation of the society as well with an intention to usurp the FSI
that will be available to the society. The complainant further submitted that
after a lot of follow up by the complainant, finally the respondent formed the
present society. However various compliances were not done. Vide a letter
dated 20-12-2022, the respondent no. 3 was present at the 1st general body
meeting on the request of the ad hoc committee held on 20-11-2022 and
respondent no. 3 assured to hand over the entire project to the society on or
before 31-03-2023. Further vide same letter, complainant requested the
respondent no. 3 to give bank lien list of all the society members within 7 days
in respect of the existing society members. The complainant further submitted
that they had requested the respondents to provide and handover 84
documents vide a letter dated 06-01-2023 for the functioning of the society.
However, the respondent neglected to handover the same. Further, a letter
dated 28-01-2023 recording serious fire incidence that occurred on 26-01-2023
was sent to the respondents and further they were called upon them to provide
CFO’s provisional Fire NOC, CFO’s Final Fire NOC, OC and Form-B for fire
system installed. However, the respondents again failed to provide the same.
The complainant informed the respondents vide a letter dated 28-01-2023
regarding the termination of contract with M/s Aryan Securities Services
Agency with effect from 01-02-2023 on account of their failure to tackle the
situation of the fire which occurred on 26-01-2023. The said fire incident
occurred as it was noticed that when fire pumps were put on, the pipes and
joints resulted into flooding of the pump room, hence the sprinklers did not


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 7 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

open. The respondents had defaulted in payment of their monthly bills to the
said security agency, resultantly they had reduced the strength of securities in
the society. The complainant terminated the services with the said M/s Aryan
and appointed Zodiac security services to look after the security. Vide a letter
dated 03-02-2023, due to fire which occurred on 26-01-2023, the complainant
informed the respondent that immediate action was required towards
repairing the Mitsubishi lift for which the complainant received the mail from
Mitsubishi on 03-02-2023. During the fire incident, fire extinguishers were not
operational, and the Mumbai Fire Brigade had to use a lot of water as the fire
was at level 4. Resultantly, the water entered into all the five lift shafts of A
wing and the lifts stopped working. However, on 28-01-2023, Mitsubishi team
made one lift operational and on 31-01-2023, they made another lift
operational. Even basic things like lights and signages were not installed till
date and the said fact was brought to the notice of the respondents. The
members of the society were suffering due to inaction on the part of
respondents in repairing the lifts. In the said circumstances, the complainant
called upon the respondents to make payment of Mitsubishi immediately for
all the elevators to make the same operational and initiate the fire audit of the
building and for requisite compliances immediately. However, the
respondents failed to comply with the same. Further, the respondents had
assured in general body meeting regarding giving information in respect of
exact numbers and location of entry gates, parking spaces, guest parking as
well as parking spaces allotment as per wing and CCTV installation. However,
the respondents had not done the same. Despite several letters issued to the
respondents regarding the aforementioned issues the respondents failed to
resolve the issues. It was further brought to the notice of the respondents that
though building received Part OC and though the respondents had formed the
co-operative housing society on 18-10-2022, the respondents have not taken
steps for fire safety audit. Though the respondents appointed a vendor for


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 8 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

maintenance and up-keep of the fire fighting equipment, the vendors have not
been paid as per the terms and conditions of the contract, consequently the
appointed vendors did not carry out work which affected the lives of the
complainant society members. Aggrieved by such inaction of the respondents,
the complainant issued a legal notice to them and for acting upon the same
the respondents had joint meetings with the managing committee of the
complainant on 04-04-2023 and 06-04-2023 and it was assured that the
respondents will complete the balance work within 1 month from the date of
the meeting. However, till date many discrepancies were found in
respondents’ work which are still pending.

7. In the present case, the respondent no. 1 is the partnership firm of the
promoter which has registered this project with the MahaRERA and the
respondent nos. 2 to 9 are the partners’ of the respondent no. 1 firm
(hereinafter referred to as the ‘respondent’ for sake of brevity).

8. The respondent has uploaded its reply on the record of the MahaRERA on 26-
06-2023 denying each and every averment made of the complainant. At the
outset, it has stated that the complainant does not have locus to seek reliefs as
sought in the complaint, as it is a cooperative housing society and had filed
the present complaint on behalf of its member-purchasers. However, no such
particulars of flat numbers or names of purchasers were provided in the
complaint. The complaint is an afterthought and the same is a mechanism of
the managing committee of the complainant to extract monies from the
respondent, without any cause of action. The complainant failed to annex any
document and has simply annexed a Managing Committee Resolution General
Body meeting resolution authorizing an advocate and a representative to
conduct litigation. At the further outset, the respondent submitted that the
complainant was guilty of suppresio veri and suggestio falsi. The complainant


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 9 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

falsely set out in its ground (d) of the complaint that the complainant was "not
given possession of the said apartment". The respondent submitted that the
members/allottees have been given possession of their respective flats far back
as the OC for the building have been received in the year 2020-2021. This
proves that the complainant has put incorrect facts on record. Further, the
complainant attempted to set out a false case against the respondent by
alleging "discrepancies" in the respondent's work and in light of such alleged
discrepancies, is seeking payment of Rs. 15 crores in lieu thereof without
providing any particulars or details of how such an amount was derived. The
complainant society was formed in the year 2022 and maintenance of the
building had already been handed over by the respondent to the complainant.
At the time of taking possession, the members of the complainant did not raise
any dispute, whatsoever as have been raised in the present complaint. The
members of the complainant society have not maintained the building due to
their own lackadaisical attitude and are now seeking funds from the
respondents to rectify alleged "defects" which are not caused by the
respondents. The members of the complainant society, despite taking
possession, have not paid monies due to them under the schedule of the
agreement for sale as well as all other charges as are applicable to them. The
complainant, thus, ought not to be allowed to seek benefit of their own wrong.
The building is constructed as per approved sanctioned plans and the
complainant cannot be permitted to raise disputes regarding consent to any
alleged changes to plans years after taking possession. At the time of taking
possession or handing over of maintenance of the building to the complainant
society, no such protest regarding quality of work, FSI utilization, alleged
changes in sanctioned plans or presence of any structural defect in the building
was made. In fact, it was only after an unfortunate fire accident (not
attributable to the respondent) that the complainant society in a bid to repair
the damage caused by such fire was attempting to extract the amounts from


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 10 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

the respondent in the garb of structural defects, when none existed. There were
no structural defects in the building, the construction was as per sanctioned
plans and all safety measures had been in place at time of handover to the
complainant. Therefore, the complainant is not entitled to any reliefs either as
prayed for or even otherwise. The respondent further stated that, certain
members of the complainant have acted contrary to the terms of their
agreement for sale and have carried out changes which have not been
statutorily approved including but not limited to covering of the duct, damage
to plumbing in their respective flats without obtaining previous consent of the
respondents in spite of being well aware of the consequences. This act of
certain members of the complainant may have resulted in structural damage
to the building. Hence, the respondent cannot be held liable and responsible
to rectify the defect or damage caused to the buildings on account of the
changes carried out by the flat members of the complainant without approval.
The complainant members were made well aware from the beginning that the
said project has commercial building and therefore, the complainant has no
legal or implied right to raise grievances concerning the commercial space in
the said project. The respondent further submitted that they had procured the
relevant permissions and NOCs from the Fire Department. The building was
fire safety compliant, and any incident of fire or unfortunate accident was not
attributable to the respondent, as it had complied with all its obligations under
RERA and the MCGM Act. Further, the respondents denied that fire-fighting
system was not operational in the building and that the DG set was not
operational on that day. The respondents have provided common amenities
and facilities to the complainant society in accordance with the MOFA AFS,
RERA AFS and the brochure. Hence, the claim of the complainant that
respondents have violated section 12 of RERA was baseless and such an
allegation made by the complainant without giving any reasonable
justification or supportive evidence should not be entertained. There were no


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 11 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

violations of the provisions of RERA. The respondent further replied to the
complainant’s claims and submissions in para-wise manner.

9. The complainant uploaded its rejoinder on the record of the MahaRERA on
14-09-2023 denying all the contentions of the respondent and has further
replied to the respondent’s submissions para wise. In addition to the above,
the complainant stated that the complainant is an association of flat
purchasers/allottees in the form of registered co-operative housing society.
Hence the allegation of the respondent that the complainant is not an allottee
was denied by the complainant. It further reiterated that the fire system and
fire extinguishers were not in place at the time of OC. Furthermore, the NOC
of MOEF has not been obtained till date. The complainant itself spent
approximately 10 lakhs to build its office. The complainant further contended
that excess FSI has been loaded on the commercial building without
complainant’s consent and parking spaces are not provided as per DCPR. The
complainant denied the claims of the respondent that the building is
completed and all the amenities as per the agreements and rules are provided
by them and suggested to appoint a commissioner or an amicus curie to
inspect and submit the report.

10. The respondent on 20-11-2023 uploaded its sur-rejoinder on the record of the
MahaRERA. It was submitted by the respondent that they had handed over
the flats to the members of the complainant society in bare shell condition,
however, the said members carried out unauthorized constructions, without
bringing it to the knowledge of the respondent. The unauthorized and illegal
construction included covering the open ducts of toilets, which can be perilous
for the structure of the building. The complainant society was called upon to
submit an inspection report, authorized by an independent architect, assessing
the unauthorized construction carried out by the society. It is submitted that


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 12 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

the unfortunate incident of fire was caused due to sub-standard quality of
wiring done in the concerned flat. However, as a kind gesture, the respondent
had paid Rs. 70, 00,000/- to the concerned member to carry out the repair work
owing to such incident. The respondent had also paid a sum of Rs. 36,00,000/-
for rentals during such period when the repair work was being undertaken.
Further, the respondent had also paid a sum of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- vide a cheque
to such member and all this is apart from the fact that the concerned member
had claimed the insurance sum, amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/-. The concerned
member till date demands monies from the respondent, despite there being no
fault of the respondent. The respondent further replied to the complainant’s
allegation para-wise.

11. The complainant has filed its written submissions on 20-11-2023 on the record
of the MahaRERA, wherein the complainant, pertaining to the issues of the
interim reliefs stated that, as far as documents were concerned which were
sought by the complainant as interim relief, the respondents in its reply in
paragraph number 32 admitted providing the said documents as sought by the
complainant. Therefore, appropriate directions can be issued to provide the
documents within specified timeline. Further, with reference to the repair of
the lift and deposit of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- a statement was made across the bar by
the counsel for respondents that the same was being done. The complainant
disputed the same and called upon the respondents to prove and provide the
details. However, it was requested to be noted that the respondents were
admitting their liability to repair the lift and also admitting that the lift
required repairs. In such circumstances, it would be appropriate that interim
orders be passed to repair the lift and undo the damage done during the fire.
With reference to creation of third-party rights in respect of additional FSI of
the society and change of plans without consent of the society members, the
complainant relied upon the clauses as mentioned in the complaint copy of the


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 13 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

complainant. It was submitted by the complainant that the changes made by
the respondents was without the knowledge and consent of the society
members. As per page 52 of the complaint memo, a letter was addressed to
the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and to the Architect of the
respondents. At page 54, the Architect of the respondents clearly admitted that
after obtaining Part OC they submitted changes which were mentioned in
Wing A and B. It was submitted that no such consent was taken from the
society members. By adjusting the additional FSI made available on the said
plot which belongs to the society, the respondents were proposing additional
floors on the commercial side. The contention that merely because the project
was registered with the MahaRERA and all the permissions by the
Corporation was granted itself is sufficient to prove that the consent of society
is misleading. Further, adding additional floors to the commercial building
after receipt of OC to the residential building is illegal and incorrect. Section
14 clearly mandates that if change in the layout is to be done, then the consent
of society members is required. In this connection the respondents in their
clearly admitted to change of plan and change of floors not only in the
commercial building but also in the residential building. Further it was
admitted that the respondent changed the gym area of the society from 54th
to 42nd floor for its own benefits. Therefore, the complainant prayed for
interim relief and for restricting the respondent from creating third party
rights in respect of commercial area and for change of layout.

12. The respondent on 29-02-2024 uploaded their written submissions on the
interim issues on the record of the MahaRERA. The respondents stated that
the complainant was not entitled to interim reliefs as the complaint itself was
not maintainable. The complainant was not an allottee within the meaning of
Section 2(d) of the RERA. The complainant in the present case is a co- operative
housing society. Admittedly, the respondent had not allotted/sold or


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 14 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

transferred any flat to the complainant society. The complainant society was
admittedly formed of the allottees who have been either allotted/ sold or
transferred flats by the respondent in their individual capacity. The
complainant society therefore does not satisfy the definition of an allottee
under the provisions of the RERA. The respondent further stated that the
complainant society failed to annex any proof/resolution passed by its
members authorizing the filing of the present complaint against the
respondent. Nevertheless, during the course of hearing conducted on 20-11-
2023, the complainant made a statement before the MahaRERA that they were
not pressing for the interim reliefs of seeking direction to the respondent to
deposit a sum of Rs. 15 crores. Therefore, the said relief ought to be rejected.
Further, the complainant society failed to make out any case for ad
interim/interim reliefs in respect of the commercial premises built by the
respondent.

13. The MahaRERA has examined the rival submissions made by both the parties
on the aforesaid interim reliefs sought for, in this complaint and also perused
the available record.

14. In the present case, the complainant which is a society formed by the allottees
of this project registered by the respondent promoter on 18-10-2022 under the
applicable law, by filing this complaint has approached the MahaRERA
seeking various reliefs against the respondent under sections 14 and 18 of the
RERA. The complainant has mainly alleged the defects in the amenities such
as Firefighting equipments, lifts installed in the building and for not providing
the documents to it by the respondent promoter.

15. The complainant, during the course of first hearing held on 20-11-2023 has
stated that out of those 4 interim reliefs (as stated in the aforesaid para no.2


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 15 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

mentioned hereinabove), it is not pressing for prayer clause (a) above i.e.
payment of Rs. 15 crores to it by the respondent. Thereby, it restricts its prayers
towards mainly 3 reliefs viz i) for repairing of the lifts installed in the project,
ii) for handover of the documents to it as stated in main prayer clause D1 to
D5 and iii) non-creation of third -party rights in respect of the commercial
building to be constructed in the project.

16. However, the respondent in its reply filed on record of MahaRERA and also
during the course of the said hearing held on 20-11-2023 has stated that it is
ready and willing to comply with the aforesaid reliefs at prayers (i) and (ii)
sought by the complainant (as mentioned in aforesaid para-no. 15). It shows
that nothing survives in the said reliefs at para (i) and (ii) sought by the
complainant. Hence, the respondent is bound to comply with the same as per
its undertaking given before the MahaRERA.

17. Hence, now the only issue the MahaRERA has to decide at this interim stage
of hearing is the prayer clause (iii) sought by the complainant about non-
creation of third-party rights in the commercial building known as “RA
Business Park” to be constructed by the respondent promoter adjacent to its
building in the project.

18. As far as the said reliefs sought by the complainant, it appears that the same is
part of the main reliefs sought in this complaint. Further, the complainant in
its written submissions filed on record of MahaRERA has mainly contended
that the respondent is utilising its additional FSI and changing the plans
without consent of its members. Further, the respondent has done such
changes in the building plan without any knowledge to its members and that
too after obtaining the part OC’s for this project on 23-06-2020, 15-12-2020 and
9-12-2021. It has contended that the said additional FSI belongs to the society


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 16 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

and by utilising the same the respondent is now proposing to construct
additional floors in the said commercial building, although there is a lot of
pending work in the project. Hence, the complainant prayed for injunction
against the respondent from creating any third-party rights in the said
commercial building.

19. The respondent on the other hand has refuted the aforesaid claim of the
complainant mainly on the grounds that it has no locus standi to file this
complaint on behalf of its members and there is no proper resolution passed
for filing this complaint. Also, it has not sold/allotted any flat to the society
and hence, the complainant society cannot be termed as an allottee in this
project and hence, at the outset, it has prayed for dismissal of the said interim
reliefs sought by the complainant.

20. From the aforesaid submissions made by both the parties on the issue of the
said interim relief at (iii) and after perusal of the available record, the following
observations are noteworthy:-

a) The respondent has undertaken this project for construction of residential
cum commercial building in this project.

b) After commencement of the RERA on 1-05-2017, the respondent has
registered this project being an ongoing project with the MahaRERA. While
registering this project, it has proposed a total of 3 numbers of buildings
i.e. two residential and one commercial. Further, while registering this
project with the MahaRERA, the respondent has mentioned the proposed
date of completion of this project as 30-06-2018 and revised date of
completion as 30-06-2019, which is extended till 31-03-2025.
c) The respondent promoter has completed the residential buildings and


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 17 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

obtained part occupancy certificates on 23-06-2020, 15-12-2020 and 9-12-

2021. It seems that after obtaining the said OC, the respondent has
registered the complainant’s society on 18-10-2022.
d) The complainant has mainly alleged that the respondent has violated the
provisions of section 14 of the RERA and without obtaining the requisite
consents from its members, it has changed the building plan and is using
the additional FSI (which belongs to the society) by constructing additional
floors in the said commercial building.
e) The complainant in support of its claim has submitted the comparative
chart showing the modifications in the approved plans dated 19-07-2017
and 19-08-2021. It shows that the plans are modified after commencement
of the RERA. However, on bare perusal of the webpage information
available on the MahaRERA it appears that as on date the respondent has
not applied for any corrections in the building details (Commercial
Building) which are uploaded or updated on the MahaRERA website, with
requisite consent of 2/3rd allottees of this project. Hence, the MahaRERA
prima facie feels that the allegations made by the complainant about
violation of section 14(2) of the RERA seem to be premature as on date. It is
ostensibly because, the respondent while registering this project with the
MahaRERA has shown the said commercial building having 1plinth+1
stilt+ 4 super structure. Also, as on date the said commercial building
shows similar specifications.
f) In addition to this, the complainant has not clarified the issue whether its
members are part of the said commercial building, whose rights are majorly
affected due to such modification in the building plan. Admittedly, the
complainant society is formed by the allottees of the other 2 residential
buildings.
g) Also, this project is ongoing as on date having revised completion date as
31-03-2025. Furthermore, the respondent has already created the third-


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 18 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

party rights in the said commercial building (as per the webpage
information uploaded on the MahaRERA website that more than 50% units
have been booked in the said commercial building).
h) In view of these facts , the MahaRERA is of the view that the grant of such
interim relief at point (iii), at this stage without granting fair opportunity to
the respondent to make its submission and also without considering the
interest of the allottees who have booked their units in the said commercial
building would not be just and proper. It is ostensibly because, the
injunction against the respondent for creating any third-party rights would
definitely cause delay in completion of the said commercial building. The
same will not be in the interest of the said allottees.
i) Further, the said relief at (iii) is the substantive relief sought by the
complainant in its online complaint. Hence, the MahaRERA will have to
decide the same anyhow.

21. In view of these facts and observations, the MahaRERA is not inclined to grant
the said relief at point no.(iii) in favour of the complainant at this stage.
However, it is clarified that the respondent is under obligation to comply with
the statutory obligations cast upon it under the RERA including section 14 of
the RERA.

22. In view of the above, the application for interim reliefs sought by the
complainant stands disposed of, with following directions:-
a) The reliefs sought by the complainant at point nos. (i) and (ii) stand
disposed of being infructuous in view of the observations made in the
aforesaid para-no.16, with the directions to the respondent to comply with
its statement made during the course of hearing held on 20-11-2023 as well
as in its reply.
b) The relief sought by the complainant at point no. (iii) stands rejected at this


Complaint No. CC006000000395936


━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Page 19 of 19
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

interim stage, with direction that the same will be dealt with by the
MahaRERA at the time of final disposal of this complaint.
c) With these directions, the main complaint be scheduled for next hearing
strictly as per seniority.


(Mahesh Pathak)
Member – 1/MahaRERA