BHUBANESWAR: In a significant ruling that supports homebuyers’ rights, the Odisha Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (OREAT) has dismissed an appeal from a local promoter, affirming the allotment of a flat to a buyer and deeming its cancellation as arbitrary and unlawful.
The case involved a flat in a multi-storey residential development in Brahmeswarpatna. The buyer had already paid over Rs 60 lakh of the total Rs 70.68 lakh but was denied possession after the promoter unilaterally canceled the allotment, citing delayed payments.
However, the tribunal determined that the buyer had adhered to the payment schedule outlined in the registered sale agreement dated July 28, 2018, which specified that the remaining Rs 7.39 lakh was due only at the execution of the sale deed.
The OREAT concluded that the promoter’s demand for the remaining amount before executing the conveyance deed violated the agreement and Section 17(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, which requires possession to be given only after the sale deed registration.
The allottee also expressed concerns regarding the safety of the apartment, highlighting the lack of grilles on windows and balconies, which posed a risk for his autistic daughter. The tribunal recognized the buyer’s worries and criticized the promoter for neglecting to address them.
Despite an earlier directive from the Odisha Real Estate Regulatory Authority (ORERA), which instructed the promoter to accept the remaining payment and provide possession, the promoter chose to return the total amount paid by the buyer, exacerbating the dispute.
In its ruling, the tribunal ordered the promoter to accept the remaining agreed-upon balance with 5% GST, complete the conveyance deed with the allottee, and promptly hand over possession of the flat.
The appeal was dismissed on merit regarding the allottee and ORERA, and ex parte against the sub-registrar of Khurda. Real estate expert Bimalendu Pradhan remarked, “Both ORERA and OREAT are committed to protecting the interests of homebuyers.”
He indicated that this ruling could serve as a precedent for similar disputes, stressing the need for promoters to comply rigorously with their contractual and statutory responsibilities, and asserting that homebuyers should not be penalized for upholding their rights under the RERA Act.
