Headnote
AI-drafted · Editorially reviewed
These ten Second Appeals, heard together, arose from a challenge to the Order dated 1st November 2018 passed by the learned President, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai and Incharge, Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (Designated Appellate Tribunal), in individual appeals filed by respective Respondents/Allottees against orders of the Competent Authority dated 2nd April 2018 (and 21st May 2018 in one case). The relief sought before the Competent Authority by the Allottees was primarily a direction to the developer to pay interest for delayed handing over of possession of their respective residential units in the Runwal & Omkar Esquare project, Mumbai.
The Competent Authority had held that the period attributable to the Appellant-developer for delay in handing over possession could neither be ascertained nor could the date of handing over possession be determined at that stage, and accordingly directed the developer to make serious efforts to expedite obtaining requisite sanctions/approvals for recommencing project work and to complete construction at the earliest. The Designated Appellate Tribunal had, however, passed an order on 1st November 2018 in the respective appeals preferred by the Allottees, which gave rise to the present Second Appeals by the developer before the Bombay High Court.
The Bombay High Court, Single Judge (Madhav J. Jamdar, J.), after reserving the matters on 29th January 2026, pronounced judgment on 8th June 2026 in all the connected Second Appeals and Civil/Interim Applications, addressing issues arising under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, including the jurisdiction and scope of the Competent Authority and the Appellate Tribunal, and the entitlement of allottees to interest for delayed possession.
Catchwords:
Real estate
RERA
delayed possession
interest on delay
Competent Authority
Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
developer
allottee
second appeal
sanctions and approvals
housing project
© LegalFirms.in — Headnote is proprietary. Raw judgment text is in the public domain
per Section 52(1)(p) of the Copyright Act, 1957.
Full Judgment Text
```json
{
"title": "Runwal Constructions Registered Partnership Firm vs Bharat Shah",
"case_number": "Second Appeal No.251 of 2022 (with Second Appeal Nos.253-261 of 2022 and connected Civil/Interim Applications)",
"side": "civil",
"date_of_judgment": "2026-06-08",
"bench": "Madhav J. Jamdar",
"reportable": false,
"parties_petitioner": "Runwal Constructions Registered Partnership Firm (and Runwal Constructions Runwal & Omkar Esquare, Mumbai in connected appeals)",
"parties_respondent": "Bharat Shah (and Nitin Korgaonkar, Pravir Karmokar, Garfield Deepak D'Souza, Satish Kumar &
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools.
For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
From ₹167/month.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
