Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association makes suggestions on amicable settlements to housing regulators to speed up disposal of cases, though experts offer differing views
Under the rule, cases should be disposed of within 60 days of hearing
To address the piling up of cases at MahaRERA, non-profit body Maharashtra Societies Welfare Association (MahaSEWA) has made a host of suggestions. Under RERA Act, cases should be disposed of within 60 days of hearing but the ground reality is much different due to the vacancy of key positions.
ADVERTISEMENT
“More than 4,000 complaints have been pending at MahaRERA for the last two years. There are many complaints filed in the last 18 months, even the first hearing has not come. The retirement of two MahaRERA members in February 2020 and then chairman Gautam Chatterjee in April 2020 has created a big backlog. Covid has further derailed the hearings,” said Ramesh Prabhu, founder chairman of MahaSEWA.
Prabhu said, “Aggrieved allottees have started losing confidence in the system. The new MahaRERA chairman has started a learning system and also started bringing the systems which may reduce new complaints. Those are good measures,” said Prabhu.
However, new members are yet to be appointed even after over 15 months have passed. To meet the challenge, new chairman Ajoy Mehta heard over 100 complaints in a day to take the consent of litigants to refer their matter to MahaRERA conciliation forum, said Prabhu.
Also read: No clarity on First Year Junior College admissions as verdict on Common Entrance Test awaited
“Nearly 50 per cent of litigants agree to explore the amicable settlement with MahaRERA conciliation forum, while the rest still wait for the new hearings to be decided by the Authority,” said Prabhu. Though one adjudicating officer was on a long leave, another adjudicating officer was appointed this month. Prabhu said, “However, looking at the pending cases, the efforts are not sufficient. Therefore, MahaSEWA has submitted a representation to MahaRERA to get the hearings of all pending and new cases as early as possible. This can be done with the existing MahaRERA conciliation forum.”
Under Section 81 of the Act, Prabhu said, the initial hearing, collecting the reply, rejoinders and written submission, etc. may be done by the MahaRERA conciliation forum. “During this process, they may explore and guide parties for arriving at the amicable settlement. This process will filter the cases, and only when the matter is ready for oral arguments, the Authority may take it up,” he said.
Citing Section 38(2), he said MahaRERA can have its own procedure to speed up hearings. “There are 45 conciliation benches and if each bench is given even 10 matters, 450 matters may be heard in one day and in 10 days, all pending matters can come for hearing. We have already made a submission in writing to MahaRERA about our suggestions, which, if implemented, may help in faster disposal of cases,” added Prabhu.
Compromise formula may not work
Advocate Godfrey Pimenta, who practises in MahaRERA, has a different view. He said, “The complaint lodged by a particular flat purchaser is only the last resort when the developer does not honour its commitments made to the flat purchaser and negotiation if any held between the parties do not yield any satisfactory results. It is to be noted that while filing a particular complaint, a choice is given to the flat purchaser whether he or she intends to opt for conciliation.”
Pimenta added, “Majority of the flat purchasers do not opt for the conciliation at the time of filing the complaint before MahaRERA Authority. As such I am of the view that only at the discretion of flat purchasers the conciliation route should be adopted and not every case should be referred to Conciliation.” The conciliation cannot be foisted on flat buyers.
Expert view
Senior Advocate Vinod Sampat, founder president of Cooperative Societies Residents Association, said, “Going for reconciliation is a sheer waste of time because in spite of the noble intentions, the builders are having a predominant position.” He said in the cases where there appears scope for reconciliation, MahaRERA officials might speak to the parties a week before the hearing to explore an amicable settlement.
“In any case, reconciliation can be done even if the proceedings are going on. The best way would be to let the proceeds go on. In between if there is reconciliation or arbitration the same will automatically be taken care of. There is no point in adjourning the matter for the sake of reconciliation giving an extra advantage to the builders. In fact, builders must be told to pay a certain amount linked to the claim if the matter has to be referred for reconciliation proceedings,” said Sampat.
Checking the track record of a builder is most important, said Sampat. “The Reconciliatory Officer as you know has got only informal powers and the decision is not binding on the parties unless they agree. I would also like to emphasise that any builder who has delayed his project or has violated the norms should be put to pay a hefty penalty so that there is fear of RERA provisions.”
To counter the administrative bottlenecks at MahaRERA, he said, “The need of the day is to fill up the vacancies at MahaRERA and to have sufficient benches so that orders are passed immediately.” He lamented, “Also, the implementation of MahaRERA orders is very poor.”
4k
No. of plaints pending at MahaRERA for past 2 years
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
