Complaints under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act can be filed for unregistered projects, but they must demonstrate the project is liable to be registered for the complaint to be maintainable.

J U D G M E N T:

1. By this Appeal, Appellant challenges judgment and order dated 9 October 2019 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Appellate Tribunal) rejecting the Appeal to the extent of the project ‘Valvan Valley Project’ and granting liberty to the Appellant to take further appropriate steps in respect of ‘Lion’s Valley Project’. Appeal was preferred by Appellant before Appellate Authority challenging order dated 5 September 2018 passed by the Regulatory Authority dismissing his complaint filed seeking direction against Respondents for initiation of action for non- registration of both the projects.

2. Facts of the case are as follows. Respondent No.1-Emnoy Properties India, a Limited Liability Partnership, with Respondent Nos.2 and 3 as its partners, were implementing project for sale of various bungalow plots under name ‘Valvan Valley’ at village Nandgaon, Taluka Mawal, Tungarli, Lonavala. Appellant and his mother were desirous of purchasing a plot in Valvan Valley project and accordingly agreed to purchase Plot No.13-B (Part A) admeasuring 22,000 square feet for consideration of Rs. 55,00,000/-. They paid an amount of Rs.12,50,000/- towards part consideration and Respondent No.1 issued allotment letter and receipt dated 28 August 2012 in the joint names of Appellant and his mother. As per the allotment letter, permission for Non Agricultural (NA) use of the land was to be obtained by April 2013 and possession of the plot was to be handed over against payment of balance consideration by August 2013. It appears that NA permission was not secured within the agreed time up to August 2013. An agreement for sale was executed between Respondent No.1 as Vendor and Appellant and his mother as Purchaser, under which, the project completion period was agreed as two years. It is the case of Appellant that Respondent No.1 failed to complete the project and later informed the Appellant that Valvan Valley project was taken over by Valvan Valley Infrastructure Private Limited, an incorporated company with Respondent Nos.5 and 6 as its Directors. According to Appellant, Respondent Nos.1 to 6 failed to honour their commitments and therefore Respondent Nos. 2, 5 and 6 offered to convey and sale four small plots in Lion’s Valley project i.e. NA Plot Nos.33 (522 square meters), 34 (464 square meters), 35 (464 square meters) and 36 (464 square meters) in lieu of Plot No.13-B in Valvan Valley project on payment of balance amount of consideration of Rs.42,50,000/-. However, since the said four plots were not conveyed to Appellant, he filed Complaint before State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 seeking sale and conveyance of the four plots in Lion’s Valley project or for monetary compensation in the alternative. On 9 May 2017 State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission passed interim order restraining Respondent Nos. 1 to 7 from transferring or selling the four plots in Lion’s Valley project.

3. After coming into effect of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (the RERA) on 6 November 2017, according to Appellant, it became duty of Respondents to register both the projects within 90 days. However, none of the two projects were registered. Instead Respondent Nos. 7 and 8 continued promoting and marketing Lion’s Valley project by issuance of broachers. In the Lion’s Valley project, according to Appellant, there are 19 independent luxury bungalows spread across area of 2 acres. According to Appellant, Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) failed to take action against Respondent Nos.1 to 10 for non-registration of either of the projects. Appellant therefore filed Writ Petition (L) No.908 of 2018 before this court seeking directions for formulation of mechanism to deal with complaints against unregistered projects. On 31 July 2018, MahaRERA gave undertaking before this court that it would modify its software for entertaining complaints in relation to