News: MahaRERA Orders Refund After Bungalow Layout Dispute-24-06-2026

Homebuyers can claim a refund when serious disputes over post-booking changes to a property’s layout and design cause the contractual relationship to collapse completely, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has held.

In the case before it, the authority directed the developer to return the entire amount paid by the complainants, with applicable interest, within 60 days of the order. Sums paid towards taxes, stamp duty, registration fees and other statutory charges to government authorities are excluded.

The buyers had booked a bungalow near Mumbai in July 2021 for a total consideration of over Rs 2 crore. They executed a registered agreement for sale in December 2021 and paid approximately Rs 50 lakh. Possession was scheduled for June 30, 2023.

Disputes followed over alleged changes to the layout and design, a reduction in built-up area, a modified parking configuration, and assurances the developer is said to have given on compensation and restoring parking access. The buyers told MahaRERA that the changes were revealed only shortly before the agreement was executed, and that they went ahead with registration solely on the developer’s assurances about restoring parallel parking access and compensating for the reduced area.

They decided to cancel in August 2022. According to them, the developer first agreed to refund the full amount within 90 days, then proposed a staggered schedule and delayed payment. They alleged the developer issued coercive demand notices and pressed for a cancellation deed citing termination reasons they considered inaccurate, which they refused to sign.

The developer, in its response, contended that the buyers had defaulted on payment obligations. It submitted that all changes were duly disclosed, were necessitated by statutory approvals and approvals from competent authorities, and that the complainants signed voluntarily with full knowledge of the final specifications. Having executed the registered agreement, they were bound by it and could not later contest the layout and specifications, it argued.

On the built-up area, the developer called the grievance untenable because the agreement was based on carpet area and plot area, with no contractual assurance on built-up area. It said the buyers were raising issues beyond the agreement’s scope, that the modifications were lawful and permissible under the agreement, and that no misrepresentation or violation of the RERA Act had been made out.

MahaRERA noted that the record showed disputes over the revised layout, parking configuration and related assurances, which led to the breakdown. It found that the developer had itself agreed in principle to cancel the transaction and refund the money, but the cancellation fell through because of disagreement over the terms and recitals of the proposed documents.

The authority observed that the relationship had "irretrievably broken down" and neither side wished to proceed. Forcing either party to continue with the agreement for sale would serve neither the ends of justice nor the objectives of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, it said. Concluding that the developer was in violation of the Act, it held the complainants entitled to relief under Section 18.