Tribunal Denies AREPL’s Appeal Delay in MahaRERA Dispute Over Thane Project

In a notable development in Maharashtra’s real estate legal landscape, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT) has refused to condone the delay in filing an appeal by Agile Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. (AREPL) against a MahaRERA order concerning its Immensa D project in Thane. This ruling has reinforced the judiciary's stance on procedural discipline in real estate cases, particularly when the interests of homebuyers are at stake.

Background: Compensation Ordered for Project Delay

MahaRERA had, on July 29, 2024, directed AREPL to pay interest to homebuyers of the Immensa D project due to delays in handing over possession. However, the developer approached the appellate tribunal only in January 2025, far beyond the legally permitted period to file such appeals. AREPL cited technical glitches on the MahaRERA portal and a medical emergency involving their legal counsel as reasons for the delay.

Tribunal Deems Delay Unjustified

The MREAT bench, comprising Chairperson SS Shinde and Member Shrikant Deshpande, found the explanations offered by AREPL unsatisfactory. The bench highlighted that:

• The developer had not applied for a certified copy of the MahaRERA order between July 29 and August 12, 2024, a period during which the earlier version of the portal was still functional.

• Despite obtaining the certified order on September 23, 2024, the appeal was filed only in January 2025—demonstrating undue delay without credible justification.

The tribunal further asserted that the developer could have appointed an alternative advocate within the permissible window and that the reasons presented did not qualify as “sufficient cause” under legal standards.

Broader Implications

The ruling acts as a stern reminder to developers about the consequences of overlooking procedural deadlines. It also reaffirms the judiciary’s support for homebuyers and its focus on ensuring transparency and accountability within the real estate ecosystem. Legal observers believe this decision could encourage stricter compliance among developers in future MahaRERA matters.

Conclusion

By dismissing AREPL's plea to excuse the delay in challenging MahaRERA’s compensation directive, the MREAT has set a precedent for zero tolerance toward procedural lapses. The verdict is expected to strengthen the confidence of homebuyers in the state's regulatory and appellate real estate mechanisms.

Disclaimer: This article is based on publicly available information and does not constitute legal advice. Readers are advised to consult professionals for specific legal guidance.