A common practice among the Builders/Developers to issue Possession Letter without obtaining the Occupation Certificate to pressurize the allottees to pay complete sale price without any chance of getting the possession or execution of sale deed.
Many builders in Noida and Greater Noida get ready to offer the possession of units to buyers despite the pendency of the Occupation Certificate.
There are such no. of cases wherein Builder does not have OC but they are offering the possession to the Home-buyers; even knowing the fact that this is an illegal act.
As per the Central GST Act there being no supply of goods within the meaning of the GST Act in a real estate transaction as ‘Goods’, as per Section 2 (52) include only movable properties.
The RERA Act mandated registration with the newly formulated state RERA authorities but the rebate was given to projects which have already procured occupation and completion certificates.
Without occupancy certificate possession of flat is not a lawful possession and it is equivalent to a rented home which can be evacuated anytime by the discretion of State Authority.
The legality of the offers of the possession by the builder in case no OC has been received by them from the concerned authority had been discussed and pronounced.
Occupancy Certificate has been obtained & Completion Certificate has been/ is to be applied/ obtained– Registration of project under RERA is not applicable
It’s overthree years, around 30 families got possession in one of the eight towers in the Unitech Escape on Golf Course Road (extension) but still didn’t get an occupation certificate.
There is still confusion about which project falls under the ambit RERA; what if the partial Occupation certificate has been received by the builder for any project, will it be out of RERA Ambit or not?
RERA was established to do away with project delays, malpractice, and irregularities in norms and increase transparency and accountability from builders and homebuyers both.
Supreme Court and High Court have given several decisions, saying that sale of properties on the basis of super area was just cheating the customers, and the authority has decided to take measures to stop this.
In the matter of Mr. Anil Mnagaldas Vade & ors. vs. Siddhitech Developers, the delay in filing an appeal u/s 44 of RERA Act, MREAT allowed delay of 14 months & 22 days to homebuyers.
MahaRERA has been a model for other states. Recently, its proved again when suo motu action was taken for the first time against large group of promoters.
CEO, and country head, JLL India said that the selling of the completed apartment is viable if the developer has enough liquidity to complete the project.
join For Updates