Mumbai: Rooting for the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act (RERA), home buyers on Wednesday told the Bombay High Court that it is a regulatory body that carries out administrative, legislative, and quasi-judicial roles like the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) or the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).
A Division Bench of Justice Naresh Patil and Justice Rajesh Ketkar was hearing a bunch of petitions on the constitutional challenge to the Real Estate and Development Bill, by nine developers in Maharashtra. On Wednesday, the Forum for People’s Collective Efforts intervened on behalf of home buyers across the country.
Senior counsel Shiraz Rustomjee, appearing for the buyers, said what amicus curie Darius Khambatta rued that the Act is not retrospective or retroactive; on the contrary it is fair to say it is prospective. Hence it is constitutionally valid to bring ongoing projects under the Act.
Mr. Rustomjee said, the RERA as a regulatory body carries out administrative, legislative, and quasi-judicial roles like the SEBI, TRAI, and the Reserve Bank of India. Hence, it is in its purview to carry out adjudicatory and legislative responsibilities. It cannot be ‘either or’, and that is the job of a regulatory body.
He said that Maharashtra and Gujarat are the only states that have framed rules contravening the Act. He also pointed out that maximum extension of only one year is allowed for a project except in the case of Force Majeure (only natural calamity as defined in the Act).
But he said, the Maharashtra rules have diluted that Section by allowing to account for court injunctions that the authority deems fit.
Mr. Rustomjee also said that home buyers are entitled to interest as per the RERA from the date of default of the original contract and not from the date of registration. “So if the home buyer was not entitled to the RERA-prescribed interest from the date of default, then why would he withdraw from litigation and appear before the RERA?”
