[gpt3]Summarize this content to 100 words
Representative ImageMUMBAI: Bombay HC has held that the term ‘promoter’ covers a co-promoter even if he hasn’t got money from flat buyers and is jointly liable under Real Estate (Regulatory and Development) Act (Rera) to refund the amount, with interest, for delays.It said under the 2016 Act, which came into effect in 2017, ‘promoter’ has “been so widely defined that it virtually includes every person associated with construction of the building”, and it is not necessary that there has to be an agreement between every promoter and a flat buyer. “Even a person who is merely an investor (along with promoter) in the project” and benefits from it falls within the ambit of ‘promoter’, it said while hearing an appeal by Wadhwa Group Housing Pvt Ltd against an Oct 2022 order of Rera appellate tribunal that had fastened it with the refund liability.HC’s Feb 26 order has stirred real estate industry, said lawyers, as it answers a substantial question of law that many were tracking. It has ramifications for many redevelopment projects in the city, said legal experts.Justice S V Marne focused on a legal issue – whether a promoter who has not received any payment from an allottee can be made liable for giving refund with interest under Section 18 of Rera.Wadhwa Group Housing had challenged joint liability on it as a co-promoter for having joined in as co-developer in an SRA project in Andheri. In 2012, the two builders, in a joint development agreement, split among themselves the constructed area to be sold.A flat buyer, Vijay Choksi, had complained to MahaRera and sought refund of Rs 1.2 crore part payment he made to co-developer, SSS Escatics, which failed to meet project deadline of 2019, said the appeal before HC.Wadhwa Group Housing, through counsel Naushad Engineer, said the amount was paid by Choksi to Escatics, which alone can be directed to refund it with interest. Engineer argued that for monies received in a pre-Rera situation sans contract between a builder and a buyer, it will not stand to reason that the builder should be made liable post Rera. HC, which also heard Choksi’s counsel Ashish Kamat, held that “account in which monies are received by promoters is irrelevant for purpose of determining joint liability”.
Published On Mar 5, 2024 at 08:44 AM IST
Join the community of 2M+ industry professionals
Subscribe to our newsletter to get latest insights & analysis.
Download ETRealty App
Get Realtime updates
Save your favourite articles
Scan to download App
[/gpt