Pranav B Prem

In a decisive order safeguarding the post-possession rights of homebuyers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has directed Cosmos Homes India Pvt. Ltd., the developer of "Cosmopolis Phase 1" in Mumbai, to undertake all necessary structural repairs as recommended in a professional audit report. MahaRERA held that a promoter is legally obligated under Section 14(3) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 to rectify structural defects, and failure to do so within the statutory period may attract penal consequences under Section 63 of the Act.

Also Read: CESTAT Rules, Service Tax Not Leviable On Hostel Fees Received For Non-Residential Courses In Coaching Institute

The complaint was filed jointly by Cosmopolis Co-operative Housing Society and a resident homebuyer, Anil Sethi, against the promoter. The matter was adjudicated by Member Mahesh Pathak, who passed the final order on 28 April 2025, after a series of hearings and attempts for amicable resolution failed.

Background of the Dispute

The residential project “Cosmopolis Phase 1” received a part Occupation Certificate (OC) on 7 October 2017, and possession of flats was granted to allottees between 17 October and 27 December 2017. The society was formally registered on 20 December 2018 and has since managed the building.

The society and a resident homebuyer approached MahaRERA on 15 October 2022, raising serious concerns about structural defects that had emerged post-possession. The complainants contended that persistent water leakages, incomplete terrace structures, corrosion in lifts, unsafe common areas, and rodent infestation had made the building increasingly uninhabitable. A structural audit conducted in April 2022 estimated the cost of necessary repairs at over ₹70,37,500 plus 18% GST. The complainants also sought ₹1 crore as compensation for mental stress and ₹1 lakh for litigation expenses.

The society stated that the builder was served with a legal notice on 11 September 2022, following the audit findings. While the promoter’s director attended a meeting in July 2022 and initially agreed to undertake repairs, no meaningful action was taken thereafter. Partial repairs were acknowledged in a society letter dated 17 April 2023, but the builder failed to fully address the issues flagged in the audit report.

Builder’s Response and Hearing History

The Authority observed that although the respondent appeared in the earlier stages of the proceedings and even indicated willingness to resolve the matter amicably, no settlement could be reached. Despite being directed to file a written reply, the respondent failed to do so and only submitted the 17 April 2023 letter referring to partial repairs.

The matter was listed for multiple hearings:

• On 25 July 2024, both parties appeared and requested time for amicable settlement.

• On 10 October 2024, the respondent failed to appear. The complainant stated that negotiations had failed.

• On 2 January 2025, the respondent again failed to appear and had not filed any reply. MahaRERA warned that ex-parte proceedings would follow unless submissions were filed by 16 January 2025. The complainants were allowed to file rejoinders by 30 January 2025.

Ultimately, only the complainants submitted written arguments, reiterating that the structural audit report and subsequent events fell squarely within the defect liability period of five years prescribed under Section 14(3) of RERA.

MahaRERA’s Legal and Factual Findings

The Authority acknowledged that the complaint was technically filed beyond the 5-year window from the date of OC. However, it held that the structural audit was received in April 2022, and notice to the builder was issued on 11 September 2022, both within the 5-year defect liability period, thereby satisfying the requirement of Section 14(3).

It was further noted:

• The letter dated 17 April 2023 submitted by the builder confirmed that repairs were only carried out in Wing A.

• Leakage and corrosion problems persisted in subsequent monsoons of 2023 and 2024, as asserted by the society and not rebutted with any evidence by the builder.

• The builder failed to submit any reply or counter-evidence, despite multiple opportunities and clear directions.

MahaRERA drew support from its earlier decision in Vasant Fiona F Wing CHS v. Sheth Developers [Complaint No. CC006000000196160], where structural defects were directed to be rectified regardless of procedural technicalities. Quoting from the findings, the Authority emphasized: “The respondent is under statutory obligation to rectify such structural defects in the said project as per the provisions of Section 14(3) of the RERA.”

Final Directions

Upon finding merit in the complaint and observing procedural default by the builder, MahaRERA passed the following directions:

Also Read: NCLT Delhi Rules, Absence Of Formal Written Agreement Does Not Preclude Establishment Of Financial Debt

1. Complaint was allowed in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

2. The builder was directed to complete all corrective works identified in the April 2022 structural audit report within two months from the date of order.

3. The complainants (society and homebuyer) were instructed to fully cooperate with the builder during the execution of repair works.

4. Failure to comply with the above directions would invite penal action under Section 63 of RERA upon a complaint by the society.

Appearance

Ld. Adv. Sunil Kewalramani appeared for the complainants

Ld. Adv. Karansingh Shekhawat appeared for the respondent

Cause Title: Cosmopolis CHS & Anr V. Cosmos Homes India Pvt. Ltd.

Case No: Complaint No. CC006000000303056

Coram: Shri. Mahesh Pathak [Hon’ble Member]

[Read/Download order]