Pranav B Prem

The Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (REAT) has held that a person need not be a homebuyer or allottee to maintain a complaint under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). Setting aside an order of the Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority which had dismissed a complaint as not maintainable, the Tribunal ruled that any individual aggrieved by a violation or contravention of RERA can invoke the jurisdiction of the Authority under Section 31 of the Act.

Also Read: Homebuyer Cannot Be Compelled To Take Possession Of Unallotted Flat; Full Refund With Interest Directed: Rajasthan REAT

The Tribunal comprising Justice P. Patnaik (Chairman), S.K. Rajguru (Member) and B.K. Das (Member) observed that the Authority had adopted an unduly narrow interpretation of Section 31 by restricting the right to file a complaint only to allottees or homebuyers. It categorically held that “an individual who is not an allottee may also file a complaint under Section 31(1) of the Act, if he or she is aggrieved by any violation or contravention of RERA.”

The dispute arose in relation to land situated at Rudrapur Mouza in Bhubaneswar. In 2010, the appellant, a landowner, had purchased a sub-plot carved out of Plot No. 280 through a registered sale deed. While subdividing the larger plot, a 20-foot-wide internal road was left to provide access to the individual sub-plots. After mutation, the appellant constructed a G+3 building by using this internal access road.

The controversy began when a developer’s sister concern obtained building plan approval and RERA registration for a real estate project over the entire original Plot No. 280. The developer thereafter asserted rights over the internal road and adjoining land, despite the fact that the plot had already been subdivided and portions had been sold much earlier. According to the appellant, the project registration was obtained by misrepresenting ownership over the entire plot.

The appellant approached the Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority contending that only the RERA Authority was competent to revoke or modify a project registration obtained on the basis of incorrect particulars. She also argued that dismissal of her complaint merely because civil suits concerning the same land were pending was illegal, as civil courts do not have the power to grant RERA-specific reliefs.

The developer opposed the complaint, arguing that the appellant was not an “aggrieved person” within the meaning of Section 31 of the Act as she was neither an allottee nor a homebuyer. It was also contended that there was no violation of RERA and that the complaint amounted to forum shopping since civil proceedings were already pending.

Accepting the developer’s objection, the Odisha RERA Authority dismissed the complaint as not maintainable. This led to the appeal before the Odisha REAT.

Allowing the appeal in part, the Tribunal held that Section 31(1) of the RERA Act, when read with the expansive definition of “person” under Section 2(zg), does not restrict the right to file a complaint only to allottees. It ruled that any person who is aggrieved by a violation of the Act, Rules or Regulations is entitled to approach the Authority. The Tribunal observed, “It is not necessary that such person must be an allottee of the project.”

On the issue of pending civil suits, the Tribunal clarified that civil courts cannot grant remedies such as revocation or modification of project registration under RERA. Therefore, the mere pendency of civil litigation cannot bar the jurisdiction of the RERA Authority where statutory violations are alleged.

Examining the merits of the case, the Tribunal found substance in the appellant’s grievance. It noted that the registration certificate dated November 8, 2021, which covered the entirety of Plot No. 280, was erroneous, as the developer did not own the entire plot. The Tribunal held that the registration had been obtained as a result of the promoter’s default under Section 7(1)(a) of the RERA Act.

Also Read: Punjab RERA Orders ATS To Refund ₹57 Lakh To Homebuyers For Failure To Deliver Possession

Instead of cancelling the registration outright, the Tribunal directed the Authority to modify it. It ordered that the project registration be confined strictly to the portion of Plot No. 280 actually owned by the developer. The Tribunal further directed that the developer shall carry out development work only on the land under its ownership and not on any part of the plot belonging to others, including the internal road. With these directions, the Odisha REAT allowed the appeal to the extent indicated and reaffirmed that the protection of RERA is not limited to homebuyers alone but extends to any person genuinely aggrieved by violations of the statute.

Appearance

For Appellant: Advocate PC Mishra

For Respondents: Advocates C. Ray, B.N. Nayak

Cause Title: [Appellant] v. Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority & Ors.

Case No: OREAT Appeal No.17 of 2023

Coram: Justice P. Patnaik (Chairman), S.K. Rajguru (Member), B.K. Das (Member)