{"id":1756,"date":"2025-12-04T19:53:21","date_gmt":"2025-12-04T14:23:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/?p=1756"},"modified":"2025-12-04T19:57:55","modified_gmt":"2025-12-04T14:27:55","slug":"maharera-declines-jurisdiction-over-fsi-misuse-allegations-dismisses-challenge-to-mumbai-redevelopment-project","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/maharera-declines-jurisdiction-over-fsi-misuse-allegations-dismisses-challenge-to-mumbai-redevelopment-project\/","title":{"rendered":"MahaRERA Declines Jurisdiction Over FSI Misuse Allegations; Dismisses Challenge to Mumbai Redevelopment Project"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

MahaRERA Declines Jurisdiction Over FSI Misuse Allegations; Dismisses Challenge to Mumbai Redevelopment Project<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\"MahaRERA\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n

Undercover Editor News Agency | Updated: December 04, 2025<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n

In a significant order clarifying the scope of its powers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has ruled that it has no jurisdiction<\/strong> to decide disputes related to FSI misuse, illegal construction, or partnership irregularities <\/strong>in redevelopment projects. The authority dismissed a complaint seeking cancellation of the registration of the redevelopment project Abhilash Phase II in Mumbai Suburban, holding that the complainant was not an allottee<\/strong> under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.<\/p>\n\n

The order was delivered by MahaRERA Member Mahesh Pathak, <\/strong>who categorically observed that the complainant lacked locus standi, and the issues raised did not fall within the purview of RERA.<\/p>\n\n

Complaint Alleged Illegal Construction, FSI Misuse<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

The matter relates to a complaint filed by Sanjay P. Vohra<\/strong>, who alleged that developer Sanjona Builders<\/strong> had committed multiple violations in the project (Registration No. P51800033199), located in Kurla taluka, Mumbai Suburban.<\/p>\n\n

Among his allegations, Vohra claimed that:<\/p>\n\n

    \n
  • The builder had taken two separate RERA registrations for what he said was essentially one building.<\/li>\n\n
  • A deceased partner<\/strong> continued to be shown as a promoter.<\/li>\n\n
  • Illegal construction was carried out over pocket terraces<\/strong> completed in 2016.<\/li>\n\n
  • The promoter had used fungible FSI<\/strong> that was allegedly sold illegally by the society.<\/li>\n\n
  • His 87-year-old mother, a resident, was pressured to waive rent arrears despite the building receiving only a part occupancy certificate in September 2023.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n

    He therefore sought revocation of the project\u2019s RERA registration<\/strong> under Section 7 of the Act, alleging the project was \u201ctainted with fraud and illegality.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

    Promoter Says Complaint Not Maintainable<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

    Sanjona Builders rejected all allegations and first questioned the maintainability of the complaint.<\/p>\n\n

    The promoter argued that:<\/p>\n\n

      \n
    • The complainant had produced no document<\/strong> showing he was an allottee \u2014 no allotment letter, no agreement for sale, no payment proof.<\/li>\n\n
    • The concerned flat fell in the rehabilitation component<\/strong>, which is exempt from mandatory RERA registration under Section 3(2)(c).<\/li>\n\n
    • Issues related to redevelopment, partnership disputes, or FSI misuse must be addressed by the housing society<\/strong> before a civil court \u2014 not MahaRERA.<\/li>\n\n
    • A part occupancy certificate<\/strong> was already issued on September 27, 2023.<\/li>\n\n
    • Concerns about common areas can only be raised by the society collectively<\/strong>, not by an individual who is not an allottee.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n

      The authority noted that the complainant failed to file a rejoinder<\/strong>, leaving the promoter\u2019s objections \u201cundisputed and unchallenged.\u201d<\/p>\n\n

      MahaRERA: FSI Misuse Not Within Our Authority<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

      In its detailed order, MahaRERA held that allegations of misuse or sale of FSI, illegal construction or irregularities by society members fall outside<\/strong> the jurisdiction of the regulator.<\/p>\n\n

      It stated:<\/p>\n\n

      \u201cMahaRERA lacks authority under the Act to adjudicate issues relating to the sale or misuse of FSI. Such grievances must be raised before the proper court of law.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n

      The authority further reaffirmed that rehabilitation flats<\/strong> do not come under its regulatory scope as per Section 3(2)(c) of RERA.<\/p>\n\n

      Revocation Request Also Rejected<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

      On the demand to cancel the project\u2019s registration, MahaRERA observed that such action requires clear evidence<\/strong> of violations under the Act. Since the complainant had submitted no documentary proof of any breach, the request for revocation was found to be \u201cdevoid of merit.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

      The complaint was dismissed:<\/p>\n\n

        \n
      • As not maintainable<\/strong>, because the complainant was not an allottee.<\/li>\n\n
      • On merits<\/strong>, due to lack of evidence.<\/li>\n\n
      • With liberty<\/strong> to approach the appropriate legal forum for issues outside RERA\u2019s scope.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n

        Case Details<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

        Case Title:<\/strong> Sanjay P. Vohra v. Sanjona Builders<\/p>\n\n

        Complaint No.:<\/strong> CC12502735<\/p>\n\n

        For Respondent:<\/strong> Advocate Bhumika Patel<\/strong><\/p>\n\n

        \u00a0<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

        MahaRERA Declines Jurisdiction Over FSI Misuse Allegations; Dismisses Challenge to Mumbai Redevelopment Project Undercover Editor News Agency | Updated: December 04, 2025 In a significant order clarifying the scope of its powers, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has ruled that it has no jurisdiction to decide disputes related to FSI misuse, illegal construction, or partnership irregularities in redevelopment projects. The authority dismissed a complaint seeking cancellation of the registration of the redevelopment project Abhilash Phase II in Mumbai Suburban, holding that the complainant was not an allottee under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The order was delivered by MahaRERA Member Mahesh Pathak, who categorically observed that the complainant lacked locus standi, and the issues raised did not fall within the purview of RERA. Complaint Alleged Illegal Construction, FSI Misuse The matter relates to a complaint filed by Sanjay P. Vohra, who alleged that developer Sanjona Builders had committed multiple violations in the project (Registration No. P51800033199), located in Kurla taluka, Mumbai Suburban. Among his allegations, Vohra claimed that: He therefore sought revocation of the project\u2019s RERA registration under Section 7 of the Act, alleging the project was \u201ctainted with fraud and illegality.\u201d Promoter Says Complaint Not Maintainable Sanjona Builders rejected all allegations and first questioned the maintainability of the complaint. The promoter argued that: The authority noted that the complainant failed to file a rejoinder, leaving the promoter\u2019s objections \u201cundisputed and unchallenged.\u201d MahaRERA: FSI Misuse Not Within Our Authority In its detailed order, MahaRERA held that allegations of misuse or sale of FSI, illegal construction or irregularities by society members fall outside the jurisdiction of the regulator. It stated: \u201cMahaRERA lacks authority under the Act to adjudicate issues relating to the sale or misuse of FSI. Such grievances must be raised before the proper court of law.\u201d The authority further reaffirmed that rehabilitation flats do not come under its regulatory scope as per Section 3(2)(c) of RERA. Revocation Request Also Rejected On the demand to cancel the project\u2019s registration, MahaRERA observed that such action requires clear evidence of violations under the Act. Since the complainant had submitted no documentary proof of any breach, the request for revocation was found to be \u201cdevoid of merit.\u201d The complaint was dismissed: Case Details Case Title: Sanjay P. Vohra v. Sanjona Builders Complaint No.: CC12502735 For Respondent: Advocate Bhumika Patel \u00a0<\/p>","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1758,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"elementor_header_footer","format":"standard","meta":{"_eb_attr":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[12,285],"tags":[288,289,286,85],"class_list":["post-1756","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-civic","category-legal-civic-affairs","tag-fsi-missuse","tag-mahaarashtra-housing","tag-maharera","tag-undercovereditor-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1756","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1756"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1756\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1762,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1756\/revisions\/1762"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1758"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1756"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1756"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/undercovereditor.com\/hi\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}