Suchitra Sudam Patil v. Kailash Chattrapati Patil
Forum: MREAT
Facts:
The appellant booked a flat in 2011, with possession promised in January 2013. Despite substantial payment, including stamp duty and registration charges, the promoter failed to complete registration and attempted to transfer additional stamp-duty and penalty burdens to the allottee.
Issue:
Whether an unregistered agreement, once acted upon, can support the allottee's statutory rights and whether the promoter can shift additional registration-related costs caused by its own default.
Held:
MREAT held that the delay was attributable to the promoter. The unregistered agreement, having been executed and acted upon, remained binding. The promoter was directed to register the agreement, pay interest and complete the project.
Ratio:
Failure by the promoter to register the agreement cannot automatically destroy rights arising from a transaction that has been acted upon. The promoter cannot benefit from its own failure to complete registration.
Practical Impact:
Allottees should retain proof of execution, payment and possession-related correspondence even where registration was never completed.
Relevant RERA Sections:
Section 13 — Agreement for Sale; Section 18 — delayed possession; Section 17 — transfer of title.
