MahaRERA Orders Godrej Avenue Eleven Promoter to Execute Sale Agreements, Pay Delay Interest to Homebuyers

June 2, 2026 : In a significant ruling reinforcing the rights of homebuyers under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has directed the promoter of the Godrej Avenue Eleven project in Mumbai to execute and register sale agreements in favour of two long-waiting purchasers and pay statutory interest for delayed possession from January 1, 2023, until actual handover of the flats with occupancy certificate.

The order was passed by MahaRERA Member-II Ravindra Deshpande in two connected complaints filed by homebuyers Prajesh Chandra Mohan, Micky Prajesh Mohan and Naina Chandra Mohan against Neelkamal Realtors Tower Pvt. Ltd., Indo Global Soft Solutions and Technologies Pvt. Ltd., and Godrej Residency Pvt. Ltd., the present promoter of the project.

The dispute concerns flats booked in 2010 in a residential project originally known as Orchid Heights and later renamed One Mahalaxmi Phase 2. The project is now being developed as “Godrej Avenue Eleven – Tower B” under MahaRERA Registration No. P51900006299.

According to the homebuyers, they booked flats in the project in 2010 based on assurances given by the original developer. The purchasers paid more than Rs. 2.11 crore each towards the total consideration of approximately Rs. 7.22 crore per flat. Despite accepting substantial payments, the developer allegedly failed to execute registered agreements for sale, repeatedly delayed construction, and did not hand over possession.

The buyers initially sought refund of the amounts paid along with interest and compensation. However, after the project was taken over by Godrej Residency Pvt. Ltd., they amended their complaints and sought execution of agreements for sale, interest for delayed possession, and compensation for prolonged delay and mental harassment.

The original promoters did not file replies before MahaRERA. The current promoter argued that the complainants were not “allottees” under Section 2(d) of RERA because no allotment letters or registered agreements for sale had been executed. It was also argued that the amounts paid by the buyers were merely “interest-free deposits” under the Request for Allotment documents and that the complaints were premature because the revised project completion date had been extended to 2028.

Rejecting these objections, MahaRERA held that the absence of a formal agreement for sale could not deprive the purchasers of their rights under the law. The Authority observed that the buyers had made substantial payments, specific flats had been identified for them, and the developer had continuously acknowledged their bookings over the years through correspondence and project-related communications.

In an important finding, MahaRERA ruled that the complainants qualified as “allottees” under Section 2(d) of the RERA Act despite the non-execution of sale agreements. The Authority stated that the continuous acknowledgment of the bookings, acceptance of substantial consideration and identification of specific flats created a legal relationship of promoter and allottee. It observed that these facts were sufficient to establish the buyers’ status under RERA.

The Authority also examined the conduct of the original developer under the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 (MOFA). It noted that the developer had collected amounts exceeding 20 percent of the sale consideration without executing a registered agreement for sale, which was contrary to statutory requirements. MahaRERA found that the promoter had accepted large payments from purchasers while failing to comply with mandatory legal obligations.

Addressing the liability of the new promoter, MahaRERA held that a change in promoter could not extinguish obligations owed to existing homebuyers. The Authority noted that Godrej Residency Pvt. Ltd. had failed to place on record transfer documents showing the precise allocation of rights and liabilities between the old and new promoters. Consequently, it held that all respondents remained jointly and severally liable for obligations arising from the project.

The order contains an important observation for real estate projects undergoing promoter changes. MahaRERA stated that: “Any inter se arrangement between respondent nos. 1 and 3, and any contractual clause or document purporting to waive the promoter’s liabilities or statutory obligations cannot defeat the rights of the allottees nor override the mandatory provisions of MOFA and the RERA Act.”

The Authority further held that merely describing the payments received from purchasers as “interest free deposits” could not override statutory protections available under RERA and MOFA.

A key issue before MahaRERA was whether the buyers were entitled to interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act. Section 18 provides that where a promoter fails to hand over possession by the promised date, the allottee is entitled to interest for the period of delay. Since no registered agreement for sale existed, the Authority examined subsequent documents issued by the developer. It found that amendments to the Request for Allotment dated January 27, 2018 and February 2, 2018 clearly represented that possession would be handed over by December 31, 2022. MahaRERA therefore treated December 31, 2022 as the agreed possession date.

Rejecting the promoter’s contention that the complaints were premature, the Authority held that delay stood established after December 31, 2022. It noted that the project still lacked an occupancy certificate and that possession had not been delivered. MahaRERA observed that the respondents had neither justified the delay nor demonstrated compliance with their contractual and statutory obligations. The Authority recorded that accepting substantial consideration without executing sale agreements and failing to deliver possession amounted to deficiency in service and violation of statutory duties under RERA.

Allowing both complaints, MahaRERA directed Godrej Residency Pvt. Ltd. to execute and register agreements for sale within 60 days. The Authority further ordered payment of interest under Rule 18 of the Maharashtra RERA Rules on all amounts paid by the buyers, excluding taxes, stamp duty, registration charges and statutory payments, from January 1, 2023 until possession is handed over with an occupancy certificate.

The regulator also clarified that the promoters would not be entitled to claim the benefit of the Covid-19-related MahaRERA moratorium notifications issued in 2020. Additionally, costs of Rs. 20,000 were awarded to each complainant.

The ruling is likely to have wider implications for stalled and transferred real estate projects across Maharashtra. The decision underscores that developers cannot avoid liability by delaying execution of agreements for sale or by restructuring projects through changes in promoters. It also reinforces the principle that homebuyers who have paid substantial consideration and whose bookings have been acknowledged by developers remain protected as allottees under RERA, even where formal sale agreements have not been executed.