Before the Maharashtra Real Estate Authority, Mumbai

Review Application: CC________________

In
Complaint No.: CC 006 000 000 000 089 695
Between:
1. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, currently )
residing at Quarter No. 48, Type-3, )
Building No.05, Ekta Vihar, CGS )
Colony, Sector-25, CBD Belapur, )
Navi Mumbai – 400416; )
)
2. Mrs Seema Rajesh Kumar Singh, )
currently residing at Quarter No. 48, )
Type-3, Building No.05, Ekta Vihar, ) …Applicants
CGS Colony, Sector-25, CBD Belapur,
Navi Mumbai – 400416

Versus

1. R.S. Enterprises; )
)
2. Suresh R Vankvani; having its )
address at 208, second floor, shiv )
center, Sector 17, Opp. Federal bank, )
Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra – 400703 ) …Respondents

Details of Review:
1. Particulars of the Applicants:
2. Name of the Applicants:
3. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh,
4. Mrs. Seema Rajesh Kumar Singh.
5. Address of the Applicant 1 & 2 :
6. Quarter No. 48, Type-3, Building No.05, Ekta Vihar, CGS
Colony, Sector-25, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai-400416
7. Address for the service of all notices :
8. 5/211, G-1, A-wing, Shanti Nagar, off. Mahakali Caves
Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai-400 093.
9. Particulars of Respondent:
10. Name of the Respondent:
11. R.S Enterprises
12. Mr. Suresh R Vankvani
13. Address of the Respondent:
14. 208, Second Floor, Shiv Center, Sector 17, opp.
Fedral bank, navi Mumbai, Maharashtra-400703.
15. Address for service of all notices: Same as above:
16. Jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Officer: (or Authority)
17. The Applicants declares that the subject matter of the
application falls within the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating
Officer (or Authority)
18. Project Registration No.: P52000007221
19. Facts of the case:
20. The present application is filed under regulation 36 of
Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (General)
Regulations, 2017 seeking review of the order dated
04.02.2021 passed by the learned adjudicating officer
(“Final Order”). Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit –
“” is a copy of the order dated 04.02.201 passed by the
learned adjudicating officer. Before setting out the grounds
on which the Final Order is liable to be reviewed, the
Applicants will place material facts and events which
demonstrates the case of the Applicants.
21. The Applicants are citizens of India, residents of
Mumbai currently residing at the address as mention in the
cause title herein above. The Respondent No. 1 is a
proprietorship firm functioning through its proprietor
being the Respondent No. 2 herein having their address as
mentioned in the cause title herein above.
22. City and Industrial Development Corporation is the
owner of all the piece and parcel of land bearing plot no.
52, admeasuring about 599.64 sq. mtrs, lying being and
 situate at sector-18, Ulwe Node, Navi Mumbai (hereinafter
referred to as “the said Plot No. 1”) and plot no. 52A,
admeasuring about 50.00 sq. mtrs, lying being and situate
at Sector-18, Ulwe Node, Navi Mumbai (hereinafter
referred to as “the said Plot No.2”), (the said Plot No. 1
and the said Plot No. 2 are collectively referred to as “the
said Larger Plot”). The Respondents are the licensees
with respect to the said Larger Plot and were granted
permission to develop the said Larger Plot. Thereafter, the
Respondents proposed to construct a building in the name
and style of Vankvani’s Ela of ground plus seven upper
floors consisting of twenty six residential units on the said
Larger Plot (hereinafter referred to as “the said
Project”). Therefore, the Respondents are promoters as
defined under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation
and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as
“the said Act”). The Applicants was desirous of
purchasing a residential premise for their personal use in
the said Project and therefore had approached the
Respondents. It was represented by the Respondents that
they have received all the requisite approvals for the
construction of the said Project and there are no
impediments which will adversely affect their ability to
complete the said Project.

23. Based on the representations made by the

Respondents, the Applicants had offered to purchase the
flat being no. 403 on 4th floor admeasuring about 529 sq. ft.
carpet area, along with the adjoining terrace admeasuring
50 sq. ft. carpet area in the said Project (hereinafter
referred to as “the said Flat”). The Respondents agreed to
sell the said Flat for a total consideration of Rs.41,46,000/-
(Rupees Forty One Lakh Forty – Six Thousand Only). An
amount of Rs.11,46,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakh Forty Six
Thousand Only) was paid by the Complainants. Hereto
 annexed and marked as Exhibit “A” is a copy of a bank
statement. The Applicants are, therefore, allottees under
the provisions of the said Act. The details of payments
made to the Respondents are more particularly
enumerated herein below:

Payme
Sr. nt Cheque Bank and
Date Amount Paid
No. Receip No. Branch
t No.

28.03.20 SBI,
1. 1013 813016 Rs.5,00,000/-
15 NERUL

01.05.20 SBI, Rs.

2. 1021 045946
15 NERUL 3,00,000/-

31.05.20 SBI, Rs.

3. 1027 661488
15 NERUL 1,00,000/-

10/01/20 Canara
4. 1148 013505 Rs.1,00,000/-
17 Bank

10/01/20 SBI,
5. 1149 717252 Rs.1,46,000/-
17 NERUL

Total 11,46,000/-

24. The Applicants state that for the balance amount of

Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Lakh Only), the Applicants
had applied for home loan with the State Bank of India,
Nerul Branch. On 06.02.2017, the home loan was duly
sanctioned and till date an amount of Rs.29,40,000/-
(Rupees Twenty-Nine Lakhs Forty Thousand Only)
disbursed by the SBI Bank. Hereto annexed and marked as
Exhibit “B” is a copy of a loan statement.

25. An agreement for sale dated 21.02.2017 was

executed by and between the Applicant and the
 Respondent with respect to the said Flat (hereinafter
referred to as the “Agreement of Sale”). Hereto marked
and annexed as Exhibit “C” is a copy of agreement of sale
dated 21.02.2017 executed by and between the Applicants
and the Respondents. The Agreement of Sale is registered
with the Sub-Registrar of Assurance, Panvel by the
payment of requisite stamp duty and registration charges.
An amount of Rs. 2,07,300/- (Rupees Two Lakhs Seven
Thousand Three Hundred Only) and Rs. 30,000/- (Thirty
Thousand Only) was paid towards stamp duty and
registration charges respectively and the same is evident
from the Agreement for Sale. It will be pertinent to note
that under the Agreement for Sale, the Respondent had
committed to handover the possession of the said Flat on
or before March, 2018.

26. After the said Project was registered under the

provisions of the Act, the Respondents informed the
Hon’ble Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority
(“MahaRERA”) that the proposed date of completion is
31.03.2018. It will be pertinent to note that the registration
of the said Project was valid for a period commencing from
17.08.2017 and ending with 31.03.2018. Hereto annexed
and marked as Exhibit- “” is a copy of the registration
certificate dated 08.01.2017 issued by the Hon’ble
MahaRERA to the said Project. The Respondents have till
date not bothered to make extend the registration granted
to the said Project.

27. The Applicants further state that when they visited

the said Flat in person on or around 31.03.2019, the
Applicants has measured the area with the help of area
length measuring tape, to the utter surprise the actual
carpet area is less than the agreed carpet of 579 sq. ft. This
was immediately brought to the notice of the Respondents
 and the Applicants called upon the Respondents to provide
area confirmation certificate from a government authorized
architect certificate in respect of the total carpet area of
the said Flat.

28. It was contended on behalf of the Respondents vide

their letter dated 07.05.2019 that the said Project has been
constructed as per the sanctioned approved plan by
CIDCO. The Applicants state that after perusal of the layout
and information made available and uploaded by the
Respondents on the website of the Hon’ble MahaRERA,
carpet area of the said Flat is 39.12 sq. mtrs. (equivalent to
421.08 sq. ft.) and the area of the balcony is 7.75 sq. mtrs.
(equivalent to total 83.42 sq. ft.). Therefore total carpet
area of the flat as per sanction plan attached with the
occupation certificate dated 24.01.2019 is 39.12 sq. mtr. +
7.75 sq. mtr. = i.e. 46.87 sq. mtr. (equivalent to 504.32 sq.
ft.). Therefore, there is a short fall of 74.68 sq. ft. from the
agreed carpet area. Any doubts as to the shortfall was
dispelled when the Applicants received the occupation
certificate along with the approved plans from CIDCO.
Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit “F.Colly.” is a
copy of certified occupancy certificate along with approved
plan obtained from CIDCO.

29. Aggrieved and dissatisfied the Applicants preferred a

complaint bearing no. CC 006000000089695 which came
to be finally decided by the learned adjudicating officer by
the order dated 04.02.2021. Hereto annexed and marked
as Exhibit –“” is a copy of the order dated 04.02.2021
passed by the learned adjudicating officer. The learned
adjudicating officer while allowing the prayers for payment
of interest on delayed possession rejected the claim for
deficit area. The learned adjudicating officer has recorded
that the “Complainants have placed on record layout of the
 building plan but the measurements are not clear. On the
other hand as per architect’s area statement placed on
record by the respondent shows that the carpet area is 529
sq. ft. as per development permission. There is nothing on
record to substantiate the contention that the area of the
flat is less than what was agreed upon.” On perusal of the
approved layout plan, the difference in the carpet area can
be substantiated. Therefore, the Applicants beg to prefer
the review application on the following grounds amongst
other which are without prejudice to one another:
30. Grounds:
a. That the Applicants during the course of hearing was
not able to point out the exact measurements of the
said Flat from the approved layout plan;
b. That the Final Order needs to be reviewed
considering the approved layout plan;
31. RELIEFS:
32. That in view of the afore mentioned facts mentioned
in point 4 and grounds raised in point 5 above and in the
interest of justice, the Applicant humbly pray as follows:
a. That the Learned Adjudicating Officer be
pleased to exercise his power of review under
regulation 36 of Maharashtra Real Estate
Regulatory Authority (General) Regulations,
2017 and after examining the legality and
proprietary thereof, be modify the Final Order;
b. That the learned adjudicating officer be pleased
to direct the Respondents to compensate the
Applicant for the deficit area of 74.68 sq.ft. at
the rate of Rs. 7,161/- (Rupees Seven Thousand
One Hundred and Sixty One Only);
c. For such other and further reliefs that as may
deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case;
d. For costs
33. Interim releifs (if any):
a. That pending the final hearing and disposal of
the above review application, this Hon’ble
Adjudicating Officer be pleased to grant a stay
on the operation and execution of the Impugned
order.
b. That pending the final hearing and disposal of
the above review application, this Hon’ble
Adjudicating Officer be pleased to restrain the
Respondent or anyone else claiming through
them or under them from proceeding with the
operation and execution of the Impugned order.
34. Particulars of the fee in terms of sub-rule A(1) of
rule 7:
Amount
(a) Mode
35. List of enclosure:
(i) Copies of the documents relied upon by the
Applicant and referred to in the Application
(ii) An Index of documents
(iii) Other documents as annexed along with the
Application.