Summary
The Court upheld RERA’s application to ongoing projects, the regulatory authority’s power to order refunds with prescribed interest, delegation of complaint decisions to a single member, and the promoter’s mandatory appeal pre-deposit. Compensation and interest on compensation remained exclusively for the adjudicating officer. Refund principal with interest was recoverable under Section 40(1). Promoters were permitted to pursue statutory appeals within thirty days subject to the prescribed deposit.
Issues
- Whether RERA lawfully covered ongoing projects despite earlier buyer agreements.
- How refund and compensation jurisdiction was divided and whether complaint decisions could be delegated to one member.
- Whether the promoter’s appeal pre-deposit and recovery of refund principal were lawful.
Provisions considered
- Section 3, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016The registration scheme retroactively covered ongoing projects without completion certificates, subject to statutory exemptions; obligations operated prospectively. (¶¶ 33, 37, 41, 42, 46, 54)
- Sections 18, 19(4), 31, 71 and 72, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016Refund and prescribed interest were distinguished from adjudication of compensation and interest thereon. (¶¶ 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 75, 81, 86)
- Sections 21, 29 and 81, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016Composition and policy meetings did not prevent authorised delegation of Section 31 complaints to a single member; regulation-making remained excluded. (¶¶ 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 112, 115, 118)
- Section 43(5), proviso, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016The promoter’s pre-deposit condition was mandatory and constitutionally valid, with different requirements for penalties and amounts payable to allottees. (¶¶ 121, 122, 125, 126, 135, 136, 137)
- Section 40, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016Harmonious interpretation permitted recovery of the quantified refund principal together with interest as arrears of land revenue. (¶¶ 138, 139, 140, 141)
Held
- The Act’s application to ongoing projects was retroactive, drawing on earlier circumstances while requiring future compliance. Prior contractual arrangements did not override the statutory mandate. The constitutional challenge failed; completed projects and the statutory completion-certificate exemptions remained outside this application. (¶¶ 33, 37, 41, 42, 45, 46, 52, 53, 54)
- Upon the stipulated failure to give possession, an allottee wishing to withdraw could demand refund with prescribed interest; an allottee remaining in the project could claim delay interest. The authority determined refunds, interest on refunds, delay interest and penalties, while compensation and interest thereon under Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 belonged exclusively to the adjudicating officer under Sections 71 and 72. Composite claims could be segregated. (¶¶ 25, 75, 77, 78, 80, 81, 83, 86)
- Section 81 authorised the written delegation to a single member for deciding Section 31 complaints. Section 21 did not prescribe complaint-bench strength, and Section 29 governed policy or regulatory meetings. The ruling did not decide hypothetical third-party delegations, which remained reviewable; adjudicating-officer powers could not be delegated through Section 81. (¶¶ 103, 104, 105, 106, 112, 113, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120)
- A promoter appealing a penalty order had to deposit at least thirty per cent of the penalty, or a higher percentage required by the Tribunal. An order to pay an allottee required deposit of the total payable amount including interest and compensation, or both requirements where applicable. Distinct obligations of promoters and allottees justified the classification; the condition protected recovery and discouraged frivolous appeals without violating Articles 14 or 19(1)(g). (¶¶ 121, 122, 125, 126, 127, 128, 135, 136, 137)
- Restricting Section 40(1) to interest or penalty while excluding the refundable principal would frustrate the Act’s purpose. The determined refundable amount and interest formed a recoverable composite sum. Promoters remained free to appeal within thirty days of this judgment upon compliance with pre-deposit, with merits for the Tribunal. (¶¶ 138, 139, 140, 141, 142)
Result
Appeals disposed of without finding error in the impugned judgment. Statutory appeals permitted within thirty days of this judgment subject to Section 43(5) pre-deposit, for decision on merits by the Tribunal. No costs; pending applications disposed of.