Bombay High Court Rules Absence of Certificate Under MahaRERA Does Not Bar Execution Application
The Bombay High Court has clarified that the absence of a certificate under Rule 4 of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017, does not bar the maintainability of an execution application. This decision ensures that the rights of real estate purchasers are protected and upheld.
MahareraReal EstateBombay High CourtExecution ApplicationRule 4Real Estate MaharashtraJul 23, 2025
Justice Gauri Godse was hearing a challenge to a civil court's order rejecting the petitioner's application for execution of a MahaRERA order granting possession of a real estate unit. The execution application had been returned on the ground that it was not accompanied by the certificate as contemplated under Rule 4 of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017.
The Respondent contended that the prescribed procedure must be followed as per the statute. Non-compliance with issuing the necessary certificate, as contemplated under Rule 4 of the 2017 Rules, would not confer any jurisdiction on the civil court to implement the order.
Rejecting this argument, the Court held:
“… the object of this Rule is to ensure that the directions for handing over possession are executed by the civil court within whose jurisdiction the project is situated. Thus, this is a beneficial Rule to implement the orders passed under the provisions of RERA. In the present case, the absence of a certificate cannot be interpreted as an impediment to maintaining an execution application before the civil court for executing the order of possession.”
The Court noted the doctrine of substantial compliance, emphasizing that the procedure is a handmaiden to justice and should never be made a tool to deny justice or perpetuate injustice.
The Court observed that the absence of a formal Rule 4 certificate would not defeat an otherwise maintainable execution proceeding, where the division bench had issued directions to execute the order in an expeditious manner.
Exemplary Cost
The Court remarked that keeping the execution proceedings pending and depriving the purchasers of possession despite the order passed by the RERA Authority amounts to defeating the true spirit and object of RERA. This is for the benefit of the purchasers who are deprived of getting possession despite the agreed terms and conditions for handing over possession on a particular date. Hence, the Court imposed exemplary costs on the developer. It observed:
“… the conduct on the part of the developer in keeping the petition pending and seeking interim protection… by suppressing the correct facts before the coordinate bench warrants imposition of costs for making misleading and incorrect statements.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order of the District Judge, and directed the Executing Court to proceed with the execution of the MahaRERA order in accordance with the law.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the significance of Rule 4 under MahaRERA Rules, 2017?
Rule 4 of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017, is intended to ensure that the directions for handing over possession of a real estate unit are executed by the civil court within whose jurisdiction the project is situated. It is a beneficial rule to implement orders passed under RERA.
What did the Bombay High Court rule regarding the absence of a certificate under Rule 4?
The Bombay High Court ruled that the absence of a certificate under Rule 4 of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017, does not bar the maintainability of an execution application. The Court emphasized the doctrine of substantial compliance.
Why did the Court impose exemplary costs on the developer?
The Court imposed exemplary costs on the developer because keeping the execution proceedings pending and seeking interim protection by suppressing the correct facts before the coordinate bench warranted such costs for making misleading and incorrect statements.
What is the primary objective of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017?
The primary objective of the MahaRERA Rules, 2017, is to protect the rights of real estate purchasers and ensure that the directions for handing over possession are executed in a timely and fair manner by the civil courts.
What was the outcome of the petition in the Bombay High Court?
The Bombay High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order of the District Judge, and directed the Executing Court to proceed with the execution of the MahaRERA order in accordance with the law.
Related News Articles
Indexation Benefits Removed for Property Sale: What it Means for Investors
property sale, LTCG rate, real estate and gold, Union Budget, investment
Pune's Yerawada Metro Station Now Open to Commuters: A Boost to City's Infrastructure
The Yerawada Metro Station in Pune is now operational, marking a significant milestone in the city's metro rail project. This development is expected to enhance connectivity and transform the urban landscape.
Tragedy Strikes Ganesh Mandal Setup in Mumbai: Speeding BMW Claims One Life, Critically Injures Another
A speeding BMW ran over two volunteers setting up banners for a Ganesh mandal in Mulund, near Mumbai, killing one and critically injuring another. The driver, Shakti Alagh, was later arrested by Mulund police.
Godrej Properties and Macrotech Developers See Strong Sales Worth Over Rs 22,000 Crore in H1 FY23
The real estate market has shown significant growth in the post-pandemic period, with Godrej Properties and Macrotech Developers leading the pack. These companies have managed to sell properties worth over Rs 22,000 crore in the first half of the fiscal y
Live Market Updates: Your Daily Stock Queries Answered
Join our live daily calls to get answers to your stock market queries and stay updated with the latest market news. From real estate to automotive, we cover it all.
Impact of Maharashtra Election Results on Stock Markets
The Maharashtra election results are expected to have a significant impact on the stock markets, especially given the potential for increased political stability and harmony between the state and the central government.