The jurisdiction of a Civil Court is not barred under Section 79 of the RERA Act, 2016 if the reliefs sought, such as declaratory and injunctive orders regarding the validity of a contract termination, fall outside the specific jurisdictional competence and remedial powers of the specialized Authority.

ORDER:

1. This Revision Application is directed against an order dated 18th December 2023 passed by the learned Judge, City Civil Court, Mumbai, in Notice of Motion No. 4181 of 2022, taken out by the Applicants-Defendants for rejection of the Plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d), and, in the alternative for stay of the proceedings in the said Suit under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (“the Code”).

2. The Applicants are the directors of Sahyog Homes Limited, a corporate entity. The Applicants are engaged in the business of real estate development. The Applicants had promoted a project (“Verona”) at Oshiwara, Andheri, Mumbai.

3. The Respondent-Plaintiff and her husband Shridhar Prabhudesai had booked a one BHK flat admeasuring approximately 540 sq ft for a consideration of Rs.37,90,800/- at an approximate rate of Rs.7020/- sq ft carpet. Upon the Plaintiff having made a payment of Rs.11,37,240/-, the Defendants issued an allotment letter dated 11th December 2009 incorporating the principal terms of contract and, agreed to execute a standard Agreement for Sale at a later date. The Plaintiff alleged the Defendants committed inordinate delay in the development of the said project. The Plaintiff repeatedly pursued the Defendants to execute an Agreement for Sale, but in vain.

4. Belatedly, in the year 2018-2019, the Defendants uploaded a draft Agreement for registration at the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (“Maha RERA”) website and asked the Plaintiff to refer to the same. The Plaintiff asserted that the stipulations in the draft Agreement were in derogation of the initial terms of the contract as incorporated in the allotment letter and compromised the basic rights of a home buyer.

5. The Plaintiff thus approached Maha RERA with a complaint of non-execution of the Agreement. By an order dated 23rd April 2019, the learned Member, Maha RERA directed the parties to register the Agreement for Sale within a period of one month in the format prescribed by Maha RERA. It is the claim of the Plaintiff that the Defendants demanded an exorbitant amount of consideration on the premise that there was addition in the area of the flat.

6. The Plaintiff had filed an Appeal against the said order dated 23rd April 2019. The said Appeal was withdrawn on 13th June 2022.

7. Under a couple of days thereafter, the Defendants unlawfully terminated the allotment letter dated 11th December 2009. The Plaintiff thus instituted a Suit before the City Civil Court, Bombay at Dindoshi, seeking declaratory and injunctive reliefs.

8. In the meanwhile, the Defendants-promoters filed a complaint before Maha RERA seeking direction to the Plaintiff to pay the outstanding dues towards the said flat and, in default, allow the Defendants to terminate and cancel the allotment. The learned member Maha RERA was persuaded to dismiss the complaint opining that a dispute has arisen between the parties over the rate at which the consideration is to be computed on account of the purported increase in the area of the flat. The said issue would not fall within the jurisdictional competence of Maha RERA. Since a substantive Suit was already instituted by the Plaintiff, the learned Member was of the view that the dispute could be legitimately adjudicated by the Civil Court.

9. In the Suit, the Defendants took out the Notice of Motion seeking rejection of the Plaint on the ground that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain, try and decide the issues raised by the Plaintiff was clearly barred by