In a case involving parking, Mumbai-based homebuyers approached the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA), seeking demolition of an allegedly defective mechanical parking system and its replacement. They argued that the stack parking was unusable due to inadequate space, improper dimensions, waterlogging, and a limited manoeuvring area.
However, in its order, MahaRERA said it lacks the jurisdiction to assess compliance with development control rules (DCR) or to order demolition and reconstruction.
The case
Two homebuyers purchased an apartment in a building in Mumbai’s Borivali around four years ago. However, the homebuyers alleged that they purchased one parking space each in the ready-to-move-in project by paying ₹5 lakh to the developer.
Upon taking possession, they found that their vehicles could not be parked in the mechanical system due to several technical issues, including their small size, which allegedly violates DCR Rules. Certain parking slots were located directly in front of the building wall, leaving no manoeuvring space. As per the sanctioned plan, the required manoeuvring space was five meters; however, only four meters was available,” the homebuyers alleged.
According to homebuyers, some parking slots were below ground level, where water accumulated during rains, though pit parking was not reflected in the sanctioned plan, and two parking positions in front of the mechanical parking were so small that even an auto-rickshaw could not move.
The homebuyers submitted that due to these deficiencies, they were compelled to park their vehicles in the open area or on the road outside the building.
Homebuyers plea to MahaRERA
The homebuyers’ complaint filed with MahaRERA sought directions for the developer to obtain the necessary permissions, demolish the existing mechanical parking system, and construct a new parking facility accommodating 40 spaces (20 for SUVs and 20 for mid-size cars) in accordance with the DCR.
They further prayed for the appointment of a neutral third party to verify the technical dimensions and conformity with approved plans and for physical site verification by a competent authority, contending that earlier proceedings were decided solely on documentary records.
Developer’s argument
The developer opposed the plea, arguing that the project had already received an Occupation Certificate (OC) from the municipal authority in April 2021, indicating that the construction, including parking, was approved as per the sanctioned plans. The developer also stated that possession was handed over “years ago and that MahaRERA does not have the authority to examine compliance with DC rules or order reconstruction.”
The developer submitted that MahaRERA’s jurisdiction is limited to adjudication of non-compliance under RERA and does not extend to matters under other statutes. According to the respondent, the complaints did not disclose any breach of RERA. The respondent submitted that upon issuance of the OC dated 28-04-2021, the society addressed a letter dated 07-05-2021 scheduling possession, and on the same date, confirmed willingness to sign possession letters.
MahaRERA’s verdict
After hearing both sides, MahaRERA dismissed the complaints, clearly stating that it does not have jurisdiction to decide whether parking is in accordance with the DCR or to order demolition and reconstruction. The authority observed that once an Occupation Certificate is granted by the competent planning authority, it indicates that the construction complies with approved plans. Any dispute regarding technical compliance with DCPR norms must be addressed by the same planning authority, not MahaRERA.
“MahaRERA is of the considered view that, being a regulatory authority constituted under the provisions of RERA, MahaRERA is constituted to regulate and promote the real estate sector and to adjudicate complaints relating to violations of the provisions of RERA. However, the RERA does not confer jurisdiction upon MahaRERA to examine or re-adjudicate the technical validity of sanctioned plans, the legality of an OC, or compliance with Development Control Regulations, which are matters falling within the domain of the competent planning authority under the relevant provisions of M R & TP Act, 1966 and the applicable DCPR,” the MahaRERA said in its order.
“Consequently, both these complaints are dismissed for want of jurisdiction in so far as the reliefs sought relate to demolition and reconstruction of the mechanical/stack parking system on the ground of alleged non-compliance with DCPR norms. However, the complainants are at liberty to approach the concerned competent planning authority, which has issued the OC dated 28-04-2021, for appropriate redressal of their grievances in accordance with law,” the MahaRERA order said.
This is what legal experts have to say
According to legal experts, in April 2024, MahaRERA introduced measures requiring developers to clearly specify parking space details in the agreement before possession. This, they say, enhances transparency and helps prevent mis-selling.
“According to MahaRERA order dated 29 April 2024, the requirement to specify complete particulars of parking spaces is a non-negotiable clause, and it is therefore mandatory for the promoter (developer) to incorporate the same in the Letter of Intent (LOI) and the Agreement for Sale (AFS) with the homebuyers,” said, Trupti Daphtary, an advocate and solicitor based in Mumbai.
“Accordingly, an allottee (homebuyer) should ensure that full details of the parking space, particularly its size, are expressly recorded before signing the LOI or AFS. The allottee should also, before taking possession, verify that the parking space provided is in strict conformity with the specifications set out in the LOI and AFS,” Daphtary said.
