December 5, 2025: The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has ruled that it does not have the authority to adjudicate allegations related to FSI misuse, illegal construction, or partnership disputes in the redevelopment project Abhilash Phase II in Mumbai’s suburban region. The regulatory body dismissed the complaint after determining that the petitioner was not an allottee under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA), 2016. The order, issued by Member Mahesh Pathak, stated that the complainant had “no locus standi” and that the case “does not involve any cause of action falling within the ambit of RERA.”
MahaRERA also pointed out that the complainant had not refuted the promoter’s submission that rehabilitation flats are exempt from registration and lie outside the authority’s jurisdiction. The matter originated from a complaint filed by Sanjay P. Vohra, who sought cancellation of the project’s registration under Section 7 of the Act. He accused the promoter, Sanjona Builders, of obtaining two RERA registrations for what he alleged was the same building, continuing to name a deceased partner as promoter, constructing illegally over pocket terraces completed in 2016, and misusing fungible FSI allegedly sold by the society. He further claimed his 87-year-old mother was being pressured to waive rent arrears despite the building receiving a part-occupancy certificate in September 2023.
The promoter refuted all claims and argued that the complaint was not maintainable. They said the complainant failed to prove he was an allottee, as he produced no allotment letter, agreement for sale, or payment proof. They also stressed that issues involving redevelopment rights, fungible FSI, or partnership disputes must be taken to civil courts. Additionally, they highlighted the issuance of a part occupancy certificate on September 27, 2023.
MahaRERA noted that the complainant did not submit a rejoinder, leaving the promoter’s objections “undisputed and unchallenged.” Concluding that Section 3(2)(c) exempts rehabilitation flats from registration and that RERA does not cover FSI-related disputes, the authority held: “MahaRERA is of the view that it lacks jurisdiction under the RERA to adjudicate issues relating to the sale or misuse of FSI.”
The complaint was dismissed both on maintainability and merit, with liberty granted to pursue remedies before the appropriate forum.
Source: Live Law
