Raajyam Realty LLP v. Radhika Ganatra & Anr.
Forum: MahaRERA
Facts:
The promoter complained that the allottees had occupied the property without permission and had failed to pay the balance consideration under a registered sale agreement. The respondents challenged the complaint, pointing out that the promoter did not possess a full and valid OC and had not complied with contractual requirements concerning possession.
Issue:
Whether MahaRERA could grant relief concerning recovery of possession or eviction where the dispute involved proprietary and possessory rights.
Held:
MahaRERA dismissed the complaint. It found that the OC relied upon by the promoter was conditional and subject to outstanding statutory compliances. It further held that eviction and recovery of possession fall outside RERA jurisdiction.
Ratio:
RERA authorities cannot assume the jurisdiction of a civil court to adjudicate proprietary or possessory disputes. A conditional OC may also be insufficient to establish that the promoter has completed its obligations for lawful possession.
Practical Impact:
Promoters should not assume that an RERA complaint can be used as an eviction mechanism. Conversely, allottees facing possession disputes involving title or proprietary rights may need to approach the civil court.
Relevant RERA Sections:
Section 2(zf) — Occupancy Certificate; Section 11 — promoter obligations; Section 17 — transfer of title; Section 79 — bar of civil-court jurisdiction, subject to the limits recognised by law.
