Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Nilesh Gala with Mr. Manish Gala, Mr. Minil Shah, Mr. Ashraf Kapoor and Ms. Alpa Gala i/b M/s. Law Square
For the Respondent: Mr. Bhooshan Mandlik, Mr. V.M. Parkar

Case Summary

• This is a Second Appeal challenging the Appellate Tribunal's dismissal of a complaint under RERA regarding non-registration of Valvan Valley project, with liberty granted for Lion's Valley project. (!) (!)
• Appellant and his mother agreed to buy Plot No.13-B (22,000 sq ft) in Valvan Valley project for Rs. 55 lakhs, paid Rs. 12.5 lakhs; NA permission promised by April 2013, possession by August 2013; later agreement extended timeline. (!)
• Respondents failed to complete Valvan Valley; offered 4 plots in Lion's Valley instead (total balance Rs. 42.5 lakhs); plots not conveyed; Appellant filed consumer complaint, got interim stay on transfer. (!)
• Post-RERA (effective Nov 2017), projects not registered; Appellant filed online complaint with MahaRERA after writ petition led to software upgrade for unregistered projects; complaint dismissed as land agricultural, no development permissions, not a "real estate project" under S.2(zn). (!) (!)
• Appeal to Tribunal dismissed for Valvan Valley (not registrable), liberty for Lion's Valley; interim stay granted earlier. (!) (!)
• Substantial question of law: Whether RERA authorities justified in refusing complaint for S.3 contravention/punishment under S.59 due to non-registration, given S.31. (!)

Key Legal Issues and Findings

• Complaints under S.31 RERA maintainable for unregistered projects if they contravene S.3 (prohibiting marketing/sale without registration); non-registration punishable under S.59; registration not precondition for S.31 complaint. (!) (!) (!)
• However, S.31 complaints only for projects capable of/liable for registration; incapable/unregistrable projects (e.g., lacking S.4(2) docs like commencement certificate, sanctioned plans) fall outside RERA purview—no contravention of S.3/S.59. (!) (!) (!) (!)
• Valvan Valley: Agricultural land, no NA permission/development sanctions; incapable of registration under S.3/S.4; complaint not maintainable under S.31 for reliefs under S.12 (interest on advances), S.18 (return/compensation), S.59 (penalty). (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
• Lion's Valley: Appellant claims oral agreement for 4 plots; permissions allegedly obtained but unregistered; liberty granted to pursue separately before MahaRERA. (!) (!) (!)
• RERA remedies additional to civil/consumer remedies; unregistrable projects (e.g., <500 sqm, <8 units, no permissions, agricultural land sans layout) pursue outside RERA (e.g., civil suit). (!) (!) (!) (!)
• S.4 mandates approvals/commencement certificate/sanctioned plans for registration; no provision for registering projects without them. (!) (!)
• Definitions: "Promoter" (S.2(zk)) and "real estate project" (S.2(zn)) cover plot development/sale, but registration feasibility governs RERA applicability. (!) (!)

Outcome

• Second Appeal dismissed; substantial question answered against Appellant (RERA bodies justified in refusing Valvan Valley complaint). (!)
• Liberty to pursue Lion's Valley under RERA; all other remedies (civil/consumer) open for both projects. (!)