Maharashtra Tribunal Bans Unilateral Possession Date Changes by Developers Without Buyer Consent

The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has delivered a series of decisive rulings against property developers who attempt to modify possession deadlines without obtaining formal written consent from homebuyers. Officials from the Tribunal emphasized that these landmark decisions reinforce the legal binding nature of the possession date specified in the Agreement for Sale, stating that any modifications require properly executed amendments.

Tribunal Establishes Five Core Legal Standards

Implied Consent Ruled Invalid

The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal determined that homebuyer actions such as continuing payment schedules beyond the original possession deadline do not constitute legal approval for revised delivery timelines. The Tribunal clarified that only express written consent from buyers, accompanied by a registered amendment to the Agreement for Sale, holds legal validity.

Grace Period Clauses Cannot Override RERA Provisions

Tribunal officials invalidated developer attempts to invoke grace period clauses embedded in purchase agreements. The ruling stated that once the specified possession date expires, such clauses cannot supersede homebuyer rights under RERA provisions, particularly Section 18 requirements for developer accountability regarding delays.

Formal Amendment Requirements

Any alterations to delivery schedules must be documented through formally executed and registered amendments to the Agreement for Sale. The Tribunal ruled that informal discussions or buyer participation in project meetings cannot serve as sufficient legal grounds for modifying possession timelines.

Specified Date Maintains Legal Sanctity

The Tribunal reconfirmed the legal importance of the possession date mentioned in the Agreement for Sale. Officials stated that allowing developers to modify this date through informal channels would eliminate the concept's meaning and deprive homebuyers of their legal protections.

Developer Liability Consequences

Builders found violating these standards face liability for interest payments on delays, calculated from the original specified date until actual possession delivery. The Tribunal retains authority to impose additional penalties and compensation in cases involving deliberate non-compliance.

Notable Case Decisions

These decisions establish clear precedent that possession date modifications must adhere to proper legal procedures and cannot depend on developer interpretations or buyer compliance through continued engagement.

The rulings strengthen homebuyer protection against misleading builder clauses and provide clearer guidelines for property disputes in Maharashtra's real estate sector.