MahaRERA Dismisses Complaint Against Piramal Estate; Holds Builder Not Liable For Delay In Homebuyer’s Loan Approval
Pranav B Prem
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) bench comprising Mahesh Pathak (Member I) has held that Piramal Estate cannot be held responsible for the delay in approval of a homebuyer’s loan, noting that all necessary project details, including pending litigations, were publicly available on the MahaRERA website. The Authority observed that since the project was duly registered under MahaRERA, the homebuyer had access to all information required to assess the project’s status, and hence, any delay in home loan approval by the bank could not be attributed to the builder.
Background
The complainant-homebuyer had purchased an under-construction flat in Tower 1 of the respondent builder’s project titled “Vaikunth Cluster 3.” Before booking the flat, the complainant had visited the project site and reviewed the builder’s earlier completed projects. According to the complainant, the builder’s sales executive had assured that all project-related documents—including title papers, details of pending cases, and approvals—would be shared, and also promised assistance in obtaining a home loan. The payment terms were communicated through WhatsApp, oral discussions, and a cost sheet. The total agreed price of the flat was ₹75 lakh, with initial instalments fixed and the remaining linked to construction progress.
The complainant alleged that when he applied for a home loan from the State Bank of India, the bank sought details of pending litigations related to the project. Despite several follow-ups, the builder failed to share these details, allegedly claiming they were confidential and could only be accessed at the registered office. This delay, according to the complainant, resulted in postponement of the loan sanction, causing him to incur additional interest. Aggrieved, the homebuyer filed a complaint before MahaRERA seeking refund of the amount paid along with interest and compensation for the alleged deficiency in service and violation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Builder’s Contentions
Piramal Estate argued that the complaint was premature, as the Agreement for Sale dated 15 October 2024 fixed 30 June 2026 as the possession date. The homebuyer, the builder said, had defaulted on a payment due on 13 November 2024, and the complaint was merely an attempt to avoid paying interest on delayed payments. The builder contended that it had complied with all legal requirements and that the project’s registration under MahaRERA ensured full public disclosure of documents, permissions, and pending litigations.
Findings and Observations
The Authority examined Section 19(1) of the RERA Act, which entitles a homebuyer to obtain information about sanctioned plans, approvals, and other relevant project details from the promoter. It emphasized that since the project was registered, all information—including details of permissions and litigations—was available on the MahaRERA website for public viewing. Therefore, the Authority held that the complainant’s claim that the builder failed to provide information required for the loan process was factually incorrect, as such information was already accessible online.
MahaRERA further observed that the delay in loan approval was due to the bank’s internal process and could not be attributed to the builder. It concluded that the complaint lacked merit and dismissed it accordingly.
Appearance
The complainant appeared in person.
Ld. Adv. Sandeep Patil appeared for the respondent.
Cause Title: Hitendrakumar Bhaichandbai Panchal Versus Piramal Estate Pvt.Ltd.
Case No: Complaint No. CC12401072
Coram: Shri. Mahesh Pathak, Hon’ble Member – I/MahaRERA
