Basic facts

In October 2018, the Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Sector (MCHI) filed a complaint with the authority, alleging that CIDCO had not registered as a “developer” under Section 3 of RERA of 2016 after the launch of several programs.

These programs involved the allocation, sale and transfer of land to MCHI members through competitive bidding, advertisements and marketing.

On 03.06.2019, the authority disposed of the complaint finding that the sales transactions by CIDCO concerned real estate for which development approvals were still pending with the relevant planning authority. These transactions cannot therefore be considered as sales for subdivision within the meaning of the definition of a Real estate project.

Further in Para 8 order, the authority held that if the complainant’s construction projects on the land purchased from CIDCO require certain infrastructure (like roads or utilities) which CIDCO is supposed to provide, then the complainant or its members can register CIDCO as a developer (land owner) when they register their projects with MahaRERA.

Aggrieved by the order of the Authority dated 03.06.2016, both the parties filed an appeal before the Tribunal. MCHI seeks to set aside, set aside or modify the order of the Authority while CIDCO seeks to set aside paragraph 8 of the order.

Questions brought before the Tribunal

1. Whether the CIDCO falls under the definition of a promoter of urban development activities.

2. Whether these urban development activities need to be registered with RERA.
3. Whether the provisions of RERA apply to CIDCO which is a statutory government organization in view of its functions under the MRTP Act, 1966.