Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Saket Gothe v. Hagwood Commercial Developers Pvt Ltd

Saket Gothe v. Hagwood Commercial Developers Pvt Ltd

(Real Estate Regulatory Authority Maharashtra)

Complaint No. CC004000000030320 | 11-01-2023

1. The complainant above named has filed this complaint and sought directions from the MahaRERA to the respondent to refund the amounts paid other than consideration to the respondent and also to pay compensation as prescribed under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘RERA’) in respect of booking of the flat bearing no. M-1104 in the respondent’s registered project known as “Prozone Palms” bearing MahaRERA registration No. P50500004915 located at Chinchbhuvan, Nagpur

2. This complaint was heard finally today as per the Standard Operating Procedure dated 12-06-2020 issued by the MahaRERA for hearing of complaints through Video Conferencing. Both the parties have been issued prior intimation of this hearing and they were also informed to file their written submissions if any. Accordingly, both the parties appeared and made their submissions.

3. During the course of hearing, the complainant has mainly contended that he has filed this complaint, mainly seeking compensation as well as refund of stamp duty and other issues i.e. charges for loan processing and VAT. However, the said claim of the complainant has been denied by the respondent stating that such claim of the complainant has already been dealt with, in the earlier order of the MahaRERA dated 12-10-2021. Hence, it has prayed for dismissal of this complaint.

4. In view of the said fact brought to the notice of the MahaRERA by the respondent, the MahaRERA has perused the final order dated 12-10-2021 passed by the MahaRERA in the earlier complaint bearing No. CC004000000010069 filed by the complainant under section 18 of the RERA.

5. On bare perusal of para No. 19 of the said order dated 12-10-2021 , the MahaRERA has noticed that the Ld. Erstwhile Member-1/MahaRERA while deciding the said complaint has made following observations:-

“19. During the course of hearing the complainant has not pressed for compensation and impliedly he has waived of the claim of compensation. Further as far as the refund of stamp duty amount, the MahaRERA has already issued an interim order dated 1-09-2021 in that regard”.

6. In view of the aforesaid observations, the MahaRERA prima facie feels that nothing survives in the said reliefs sought by the complainant this complaint towards the compensation, refund of stamp duty, VAT etc. Hence, the only course of action for the complainant is to file an appeal specifically against the said para 19 of the order dated 12-10-2021, if he is desirous to raise the issue of compensation as well as refund of stamp duty etc.

7. In view of the above, the MahaRERA does not find any merits in this complaint.

8. Consequently, the present complaint stands dismissed being not maintainable.

Advocate List
  • Ashwin Shah

  • Sanjay Chaturvedi

Bench
  • Mahesh Pathak&nbsp
  • Member
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/RERA/2023/60
Head Note

— Insolvency, Bankruptcy & Companies Act, 2013 — Ss. 7, 18 and 19 — Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 — Refund of stamp duty, VAT etc. — Waiver of claim of compensation — Held, in view of the observations made in the earlier order, the only course of action for the complainant is to file an appeal specifically against the said para 19 of the order dt. 12-10-2021, if he is desirous to raise the issue of compensation as well as refund of stamp duty etc.