| Date of Order | Sections Invoked | Complainant & Respondent | Summary of Case | Download |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Rajkumar Mandal and Sagarika Mandal
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Rrt. Ltd vs WBRERA |
This West Bengal RERA order addresses a complaint regarding the cancellation of a real estate project. The applicants purchased a 3BHK apartment in 2018 and deposited a total sum of Rs 6,10,000/-, along with a commission of Rs 10,000/-. The core grievance is that the developer informed the applicants in March 2020 that the project was cancelled due to technical reasons, and the applicants have yet to receive any refund. They seek the refund of the entire principal amount, plus specified RERA interest, and the return of the commission paid. The Authority, after hearing both parties, granted the request to include the spouse as a Joint Complainant. Procedurally, the Authority issued several directions: 1. The applicants are directed to submit their detailed complaint petition via a Notarized Affidavit, annexing all supporting documents, and serving the original to the Authority and the developer within 15 days. 2. The developer is directed to submit a formal Written Response. 3. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 14.05.2024. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016. |
Complainant: Mita Sinha and Aparesh Sinha
Respondent: West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority
Calcutta Greens Commercial Complex (1st Floor)
1.050/2, Survey Park, Kolkata- T0O 07S. vs WBRERA |
The Authority heard detailed submissions regarding various grievances concerning a residential development. The core complaints highlighted significant discrepancies, including differences in conveyance deeds, inadequate car parking space, lack of proper EV charging infrastructure, and issues with water temperature due to faulty design. Further concerns included the non-installation of promised solar power, exclusion of underground basements from common areas, and disputes over maintenance funds and the formation of a single association for different income groups. After considering the submissions, the Authority directed the matter for further hearing and order under Section 31 of the RERA Act. Key directions issued include: 1. Including the joint allottee as a joint complainant in all records. 2. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed complaint petition on a notarized affidavit, along with supporting documents, within fifteen days. 3. The respondent is directed to submit a written response on a notarized affidavit, also with supporting documents, within fifteen days. The Authority fixed a date for further physical hearing and order, ensuring all parties comply with the submission requirements. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 14 of Chapter III of the RERA Act, 2016; Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016; and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Rukma Rajamuthaiya
Respondent: West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The core complaint alleges systemic failure in the upkeep and maintenance of the complex over the past year. Specific grievances include the non-repair of the borewell, failure to service fire safety alarms, and the continued obstruction of critical equipment by car parking. Furthermore, the complaint highlights the non-repair of the generator set, the refusal to facilitate the formation of the Apartment Owners Association by withholding necessary documents, and the failure to appoint a Facility Manager, leading to operational mismanagement. The complaint also cites the non-rectification of constructional defects post-handover, violating the defects liability clause. The Authority has directed both parties to submit detailed, notarized affidavits. The Complainant must submit their comprehensive submission and supporting documents within 15 days. The Respondent is directed to file a written response on a notarized affidavit within 15 days of receiving the Complainant’s affidavit. Crucially, the Respondent must also confirm the actual date of project completion and whether the Completion Certificate (C.C.) has been received, attaching proof if available. | |
| X-Y-Z | Rule 36(2)(h) (WB Rules, 2021); Section 29 (RERA Act, 2016); Section 18 read with Rule 17 & 18 (WB Rules, 2021); Section 63 (RERA Act, 2016). |
Complainant: Riya Bhattachar
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order was passed by the Authority after proceeding *ex-parte*, noting the respondent's failure to appear despite due service of notice. The complaint concerned the non-delivery of a booked apartment and the failure to execute the sale agreement, despite the complainant having paid a total amount of Rs. 3,77,580/-. The Authority found that the respondent failed to fulfill its obligation to provide possession of the flat within the stipulated timeline. Consequently, the Authority directed the respondent to refund the entire principal amount of Rs. 3,77,580/-. Crucially, the order mandates that the refund must include interest calculated at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Rate + 2% per annum. This interest period starts from the respective dates of payments made by the complainant until the date of realization. The refund must be processed via bank transfer within 45 days of the Authority's order being received by email. The order also empowers the complainant to file an Execution Application if the refund is not completed within the specified period, warning that default may incur a penalty up to five percent of the project's estimated cost. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 63 of RERA, 2016; Rule 2 of RERA Rules, 2027; Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913; Rule 26 of the Rules; Section 4O of RERA, 2016 read with Rule 25 of WB Rules, 2021; Rule 25 of WB Rules, 2027; Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913; Rule 25 |
Complainant: Riya Bhattacharya
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order addresses the execution of a final order passed on January 30, 2024, following repeated non-compliance by the respondent. The Authority noted that despite multiple directions, the respondent failed to remit the due amounts, rejecting the request for further time. Consequently, the Authority imposed a penalty of ₹1,000/- for every day of default, effective from the 46th day after the original order date. Given the persistent default, the Authority mandated the execution of the order through the District Magistrate (DM) of North 24-Parganas, utilizing provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Authority directed the Secretary, WBRERA, to immediately send certified copies of this execution order and the original final order to the DM. The DM is mandated to initiate recovery proceedings, treating the dues and the imposed penalty as arrears of land revenue, and ensure the funds are deposited into the specified State Bank of India account. Crucially, the Authority directed the DM to execute the order within one month of receiving the documents and submit a compliance report within six weeks, emphasizing the need for speedy action consistent with judicial directives. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, read with Rule 36 of the west Bengal Real Estate (Regulation Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Sekhar Ray
Respondent: Eden Real Estates Pvt. Ltd vs WBRERA |
This order, issued by the West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority, addresses a comprehensive complaint concerning alleged irregularities in a real estate project. The core allegations include the failure to form a Resident Owner Association (ROA), unauthorized construction, encroachment, double sale of common areas, land disputes, and substandard construction work. The complainant has sought substantial relief, claiming over ₹200 crores, covering unauthorized funds, land disputes, infrastructure costs, and compensation for mental agony. The Authority has admitted the matter for further proceedings under Section 31 of the RERA Act. Procedurally, the Authority has issued specific directions: 1. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed submission via a Notarized Affidavit, annexing supporting documents, and must also provide a reasoned explanation for the delay in filing the complaint. 2. The respondent is directed to file a comprehensive Written Response through a Notarized Affidavit, supported by documents. Both parties are mandated to submit these affidavits within 15 days. The matter is scheduled for further hearing and order on 17.04.2024. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 35 of the RERA Act, 2016; Section 35; West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972; Section 36 of the RERA Act; Section 35. |
Complainant: Sekhar Ray
Respondent: West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority vs WBRERA |
This order, issued by the Authority, addresses a complaint seeking a stay on the sale of flats and construction of a real estate project, filed under Section 35 of the RERA Act. After hearing arguments regarding the formation of an Association of Allottees (AOA) and the project's compliance status, the Authority issued several binding directives. The Respondent is mandated to provide crucial clarifications, including confirming whether the project received a Completion Certificate (CC). If the CC was issued before the RERA Act's enforcement, the project must be mandatorily registered with the Authority, and the Respondent must explain the rationale for its current registration status. Furthermore, the Respondent must detail the steps taken for AOA formation under the West Bengal Apartment Ownership Act, 1972, and must expedite the AOA formation process within 90 days. The Complainant is directed to formally submit the Section 35 application to the Respondent's advocate. Finally, the Respondent must submit a detailed written response to the Complainant's stay application (read with Section 36) within 15 days. The matter is scheduled for review on the next date of hearing. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016; Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Moonmoon Saha and Sudipta Kumar Saha
Respondent: MKHS Housing LLP vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing under Section 31 of the RERA Act, noting a dispute regarding the refund of funds paid for a residential flat in a specific project. The core issue revolves around the failure to refund the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest, despite the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The complainants allege that while a partial refund was made, the respondent failed to remit the remaining principal amount, the full interest calculated at the agreed rate (15% p.a.), and the Service Tax collected. The Authority did not pass a final order but issued comprehensive directions to both parties. The complainants are directed to submit a notarized affidavit detailing their complaint and supporting documents within fifteen days. Crucially, the respondent is directed to file a written response on a notarized affidavit addressing several critical compliance points, including: 1. Whether the project is registered with WBHIRA/WBRERA. 2. The project's commencement date and allottee count. 3. The status of possession delivery and whether a Completion Certificate (CC) has been obtained. The matter is fixed for further hearing, requiring both parties to submit their detailed affidavits and documentary evidence. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, read with Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Moonmoon Saha and Sudipta Kumar Saha
Respondent: MKHS Housing LLP vs WBRERA |
This order, passed by the Authority, addresses a complaint concerning the non-refund of funds paid for a residential unit in a real estate project. The core dispute revolves around the failure of the developer to refund the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest, despite an initial Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) executed in 2014. The complainant alleges that the developer has failed to refund the remaining principal (Rs. 3,90,170/-), the interest on the principal amount (Rs. 22,00,000/-), and a specific Service Tax amount (Rs. 87,809/-). The Authority admitted the matter under Section 31 of the RERA Act, directing both parties to file detailed submissions on notarized affidavits within fifteen days. Crucially, the developer is specifically directed to address several compliance issues in their affidavit, including: 1. Whether the project is registered with WBHIRA/WBRERA. 2. The project's commencement date and allottee count. 3. The status of possession delivery and whether a Completion Certificate (CC) has been obtained. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 09.01.2024. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 61 of RERA, 2016 (Penalty). Section 40 of RERA, 2016 (Execution). |
Complainant: Romit Banerjee
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order addresses the execution of a previous final order passed by the Authority. During the hearing, it was noted that the respondent failed to refund the full amount as mandated by the Authority's order dated 07.09.2023. Finding the respondent in persistent non-compliance, the Authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five lakhs only) under Section 61 of the RERA Act for violating the previous directives. To ensure recovery, the Authority directed the matter to be executed through the District Magistrate of the concerned district (North 24-Parganas). The complainant consented to this mechanism, which involves initiating a Certificate Case under the Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913. The Authority formally directs the District Magistrate to execute the original order and the newly imposed penalty. The DM is mandated to initiate the recovery process within one month of receiving the certified copies and must submit a compliance report to the Authority within six weeks. The Authority emphasized the need for speedy execution, referencing Supreme Court guidelines. The complainant is advised to pursue the recovery process directly with the District Magistrate's office. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Merlin Projects Limited
Respondent: Apu Chakraborty, Tapan Chakraborty and Mithu Chakraborty vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning a registered Agreement for Sale of an apartment within a real estate project. The complainant alleges that despite making substantial payments and receiving multiple reminders, the respondents have failed to clear outstanding dues or provide a positive resolution regarding the sale agreement. The complainant specifically seeks a direction from the Authority to register the necessary cancellation document to resolve the matter and enable further action. After hearing both parties, the Authority admitted the complaint and issued procedural directions under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act. The Authority directed the complainant to submit a comprehensive submission via a notarized affidavit, annexing all supporting documents, within fifteen days. Simultaneously, the respondent was directed to file a detailed written response on a notarized affidavit, also with supporting documents, within fifteen days of receiving the complainant's affidavit. The matter was adjourned, and a date of 19.03.2024 was fixed for the next hearing and order. The core of the order is procedural, mandating both parties to formally submit their detailed case submissions to the Authority. | |
| X-Y-Z | Clause 9 of the Proforma of the Agreement for Sale at Annexure-'A' of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Merlin Projects Limited
Respondent: Apu Chakraborty, Tapan Chakraborty and Mithu Chakraborty vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning the default of an allottee regarding an Agreement for Sale executed in 2022. The Authority noted that the allottee failed to make payments, constituting a default in more than three consecutive demands as per the payment plan. After hearing both parties, the Authority invoked Clause 9 of the Agreement for Sale, which allows the promoter to cancel the allotment upon sustained default. The Authority has issued the following directions: 1. The allottee is granted a period of 45 days to remit all outstanding dues to the promoter. 2. Should the allottee fail to make the payment within this stipulated time, the Authority permits the promoter to unilaterally cancel the Agreement for Sale and apply for the deed of cancellation. 3. Upon cancellation, the promoter must refund the principal amount paid by the allottee (Rs. 3,74,756/-) after deducting the booking amount and any interest liabilities. 4. The promoter is also granted the liberty to re-allot the property to any third party. The matter is disposed of with the directive that the refund and de-registration process must be completed within 45 days from the date of the order. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, read with Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Subhadip Chakraborty and Esa Mukhopadhyay
Respondent: Westroad LLP
Rajendra Chatterjee
West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the complaint petition for further hearing, addressing serious allegations regarding a real estate project. The core grievances include substandard built quality, such as bent beams, incorrect floor slopes, and poorly fitted tiles. Further complaints detail overcharging for extra work, faulty bathroom fittings, and disputes over parking allocation. The complainants also alleged improper handover procedures and subsequent unlawful actions, including unauthorized concealed work and harassment post-possession. The Authority issued several directives to move the matter forward. It mandated the inclusion of the joint allottee as a joint complainant and the partnership firm as a necessary respondent party. Both the complainants and the respondents are now directed to submit their detailed submissions in the form of notarized affidavits, along with supporting documents, within fifteen days. The Authority has scheduled a subsequent physical hearing to adjudicate the matter based on these submissions. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: SK Mahasin Ali
Respondent: KGN Construction vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The core dispute revolves around the non-registration of a booked flat and the failure to provide the covered parking facility, both stipulated in the Agreement for Sale, despite the Complainant being in physical possession of the unit. After hearing both parties, the Authority issued specific procedural directions. The Complainant is mandated to submit a notarized affidavit detailing the complaint, along with supporting documents, within fifteen days. Similarly, the Respondent is directed to file a written response on a notarized affidavit, addressing the claims and attaching relevant supporting documents, within fifteen days of receiving the Complainant's affidavit. Crucially, the Authority emphasized the possibility of an amicable resolution, encouraging both parties to pursue a mutual settlement. Should a settlement be reached, a joint affidavit must be submitted to the Authority. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 19.03.2024. | |
| X-Y-Z | Rule 36(2)(h) of WB RERD Rules; Section 13(2)(b) of RERA Act, 2016; Section 18 of RERA Act, 2016; and Rule 17 & 18 of WB RERD Rules. |
Complainant: Jayashri Manna Saha and Purnendu Manna
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order was passed by the Authority after considering the complaint regarding the non-delivery of a booked residential flat. The complainants submitted evidence detailing the payment of a total principal amount for the property. The Authority found that the developer failed significantly in its obligation to hand over possession of the flat within the stipulated timeline. Consequently, the Authority ruled in favor of the complainants, directing the developer to refund the entire principal amount paid. Furthermore, the developer is mandated to pay statutory interest on the refunded amount. This interest must be calculated at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Rate + 2% per annum, commencing from the respective dates of payment until the date of realization. The developer must ensure the refund is made via bank transfer to the complainants' account within 45 days of receiving this order. The Authority also noted that failure to comply with this order may result in penalties. The matter is hereby disposed of with these directions. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, read with Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016. |
Complainant: Dr. Sanghamitra Dasgupta and Mr. Rajarshi Dasgupta & Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the complaint petition for further hearing under the provisions of the RERA Act. The core dispute revolves around the non-refund of a substantial amount paid for a residential flat in a proposed housing complex. The allottees allege that after paying the sum and executing an agreement for a 3BHK flat, the construction was significantly delayed, leading them to cancel the booking in 2019, but the refund has not been processed. The Authority took several procedural steps, including correcting the official details of the respondent in the hearing notice and formally including the joint allottee in the records. The primary directions issued were procedural: 1. The complainants are directed to submit their detailed submission, supported by a notarized affidavit and documents, within 15 days. 2. The respondent is directed to submit a written response on a notarized affidavit, along with supporting documents, within 15 days. The matter has been scheduled for further hearing on 15.04.2024, pending the submission of the required affidavits and responses from both parties. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 40 of the RERA Act, 2016; Rule 25 of the WBERERA Rules, 2021; Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913. |
Complainant: Dr. Sanghamitra Dasgupta and Mr. Rajarshi Dasgupta
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order addresses the execution of a previous final order concerning the refund of an amount. Noting the absence of the respondent and the complainant's submission, the Authority found that the respondent was failing to comply with the directive to refund the entire amount. Consequently, the Authority initiated the formal execution process. Given the similarity to Supreme Court precedents, the Authority directed the matter to be executed by the District Magistrate of North 24-Parganas. The execution is mandated under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016, read with Rule 25 of the West Bengal RERA Rules, 2021. The District Magistrate is directed to initiate the recovery process through a certificate case under the Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act, 1913. The Authority mandated that the District Magistrate take necessary action to execute the order within one month from the date of receiving the certified copy. The Authority also directed the Secretary, WBRERA, to promptly send the necessary certified copies and documents to the District Magistrate to facilitate immediate compliance. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 13, Section 1, Section 13, Section 18, Section 61, and Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. |
Complainant: Arihant Sethia and Richika Sethia
Respondent: Siddha Infradev LLP vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the complaint, which alleged significant violations of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The core dispute revolves around the developer accepting payments in excess of 10% of the total apartment price without executing or registering the Agreement for Sale (violating Section 13). The allottees further alleged continuous harassment, demands for excess installments, threats of cancellation, and a substantial delay in handing over possession since December 2022 (violating Section 18). Relief sought included mandatory registration of the sale agreement, refund of excess payments with interest, and imposition of penalties. The Authority directed the matter to proceed for further hearing. Key directions issued include: 1. Both parties must submit detailed written responses and affidavits within 15 days. 2. Crucially, both parties must attach all relevant communications and specifically explain the failure to register the Agreement for Sale. 3. Interim relief was granted, prohibiting the developer from cancelling the allotment or the Agreement for Sale until the matter is disposed of. The order also emphasized that the parties remain free to pursue an amicable mutual settlement. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 13 of RERA, 2016; Section 13 of RERA, 2016; Section 13 of RERA, 2016; Section 1g of RERA, 2016; Section 61 of RERA, 2016; and Section 31 of RERA, 2016. |
Complainant: Bibek Sethia and Sushma Sethia
Respondent: Siddha Infradev LLP vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the complaint, which alleges significant violations of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The core dispute revolves around the developer accepting substantial amounts from the allottees without executing or registering the mandatory Agreement for Sale, thereby violating Section 13 of the Act. The allottees sought several reliefs, including the mandatory registration of the Agreement for Sale, the refund of excess payments received, withdrawal of illegal installment demands, compensation for delayed possession, and reimbursement of rent paid. The Authority directed both parties to submit detailed affidavits and written responses. Crucially, both sides must annex all relevant communications and specifically address the reasons for the delay in registering the Agreement for Sale. Interimly, the Authority issued a binding direction that no cancellation of the allotment or the Agreement for Sale shall occur until the matter is finally disposed of. The matter was scheduled for further hearing after compliance with these procedural directions. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 36 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Suwo Datta
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order, issued by the West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority, addresses a complaint concerning alleged deviations from a Deed of Conveyance (DoC) in a real estate development project. The core grievance centers on the developer's failure to adhere to the original commitments. The complainant alleges that despite purchasing a 4 khattah plot with guaranteed 15-foot road access on the South and West sides, the developer is obstructing the promised road access, planning to deduct land area, and altering the approved project layout. Specific concerns include the removal of planned community facilities and the construction of multi-storied buildings contrary to the original plan. The Authority, after hearing the complaint, admitted the matter for further proceedings under the RERA Act, 2016. The Authority issued several key directions: 1. The complainant must submit a notarized affidavit and supporting documents within 15 days. 2. The developer must submit a written response on a notarized affidavit, along with supporting documents, within 15 days. 3. Crucially, the developer is immediately directed to halt all construction activities until the final disposal of the complaint. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 11.01.2024. |