The Act, 2016 is retroactive in operation, and the court clarified the requirements for project registration, the validity of completion certificates, and the procedure for imposing penalties.

JUDGMENT :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

1. M.S.A. No. 5 of 2023 is one filed under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“the Act, 2016” hereinafter) arises out of order in REFA No. 47/2022 on the files of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam dated 16.11.2022 which emerges from the order dated 01.06.2022 in Suo Motu Complaint No. 1576/K-RERA/2021, on the files of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority. The appellant herein is Greeceland Foundation, the 1st respondent is the Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the 2nd respondent is the Greeceland Foundation Residents Welfare Association.

2. M.S.A. No. 7 of 2023 is an appeal arising out of the same order at the instance of Greeceland Foundation Residents Welfare Association. The respondents are Greeceland Foundation and the Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

3. The parties in these appeals will be referred as promoter and allottees, hereinafter for convenience.

4. Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant/promoter and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents/allottees.

5. Precisely on the facts of this case, in a suo motu proceedings initiated by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, the Authority directed the promoter to apply for registration of the Real Estate Project “Graceland” located at Mulanthuruthy. Ernakulam District under Sec 3 of the Act, 2016 and as per Section 3(4) of Kerala Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2018 (hereinafter referred as Rule, 2018 for easy reference), within 30 days on receipt of the order, through an application made online along with the required fee. Further penalty of Rupees 10,00,000/- (Ten Lakhs) also was imposed to be paid in the form of Demand Draft drawn in favour of Kerala Real Estate Regulatory Authority, payable at Thiruvananthapuram as provided under Section 59(1) of the Act, 2016.

6. Challenging the said verdict, the promoter filed REFA No. 47/2022 before the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Ernakulam. The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal in part as under:

In the result, this appeal is allowed in part. Accordingly the second part of the impugned order of the K-RERA dated 1/6/2022 in the Suo Moto Complaint No. 1576/K-RERA/2021 imposing penalty, is hereby set aside, leaving the said proceedings to be initiated at the right stage later, on proof of non-compliance of the directions made under Section 3 of the Act, but the first part of the order directing registration of the appellant’s project Graceland Foundation under Section 3 of the Act, is confirmed. The parties will bear their respective costs of the appeal.

7. On hearing the matter, these appeals stand admitted by formulating the following substantial questions of law:

1. What are the effective dates on which the various Sections of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 came into force? and whether the Act is retroactive in operation?

2. What are the projects which would require registration as provided under Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

3. Whether the Real Estate Regulatory Authority is legally justified in ordering registration of the promoter’s project, which was allegedly completed on 07/04/2017 and where there is a deemed Occupancy with effect from 22/04/2017, when the Real Estate Regulatory Authority itself was constituted only by G.O. (P) No. 65/2019/LSGD dated 05/10/2019 and public notice thereof was given only on 26/12/2019 and the Real Estate Regulatory Authority was launched only 01.01.2020?

4. What is the manner in which the Real Estate Regulatory Authority can impose penalty by way of cost for non-registration of real estate project by invoking the power under Section 59(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

8. On perusal of the order issued by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, which led to filing of REFA No. 47/2022 the same would go to show that the authority found that at the time of commencement of Section