The Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MREAT), Mumbai, presided over by Chairperson

1. S. S. Shinde J. and Member Shrikant M. Deshpande, has dismissed an appeal filed by Era Realtors Private Limited and Omkar Realtors and Developers Private Limited after observing the promoters’ “dilatory strategy” in challenging a recovery warrant.

The Tribunal rejected the developers’ application for condonation of delay, noting that even after excluding the time spent pursuing a review application, the appeal was still filed 90 days beyond the statutory limitation period without any “sufficient cause” shown.

️ Case Background

The appeal was directed against an order dated February 7, 2024, passed by the Adjudicating Officer (AO) of MahaRERA. The AO’s order, issued in non-compliance proceedings, had greenlit a warrant under Section 40(1) of RERA for the recovery of ₹4,22,68,102/- plus interest at the MCLR + 2% rate.

This recovery warrant was issued to execute a final order from February 12, 2021, which had directed the promoters (Omkar and Era Realtors) to pay interest to the allottees for failure to provide possession by the specified date.

The allottees, including Chanchal Rastogi and others, were represented by Advocate Sharon Fernandes. And Adv. Sulaiman Bhimani of “The Law Suits” The developers, represented by Advocate Shakib Shaikh, challenged the February 2024 recovery order by filing an appeal on May 21, 2025, which was delayed by a total of 469 days.

Misuse of Law to Frustrate Homebuyers

The Tribunal took a critical view of the developers’ conduct, which was characterized as a “dilatory strategy” designed to frustrate the homebuyers and stall the recovery¹².

The allottees’ counsel highlighted a specific sequence of litigation that demonstrated the developers’ misuse of the legal system:

1. Filing a Review Application: First, the developers filed a review application on 04.05.2024 to challenge the recovery order.
2. Filing a Writ Petition: Then, while that review application was still pending, the developers “had also filed Writ Petition No.8720 of 2024 before the Hon’ble High Court for stay on the execution of the warrant”. This move did not result in the requested stay. Instead, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in its wisdom, “was pleased to direct the applicants to hand over the keys of the subject flat to the allottees” —the original complainants, which include Chanchal Rastogi. The Tribunal viewed this action, followed by the filing of the present appeal only after the review was dismissed, as clear evidence of the developers’ “delay tactics and part of dilatory strategy” to misuse the legal system and “frustrate the fruits of the impugned order” for the homebuyers.
3. Filing an Appeal: Finally, only after their review application was dismissed on March 19, 2025, the developers filed the present (and heavily delayed) appeal on May 21, 2025.

This pattern of filing multiple proceedings—a review, a writ petition, and then an appeal—all against the same execution order, was seen by the Tribunal as a clear effort to “frustrate the fruits of the impugned order”.

The Tribunal further noted that the promoters never filed an appeal against the original 2021 order that established their liability in the first place, allowing it to attain finality. Their actions were focused solely on stalling the execution, which, as the Tribunal concluded, “amounts to delay tactics and part of dilatory strategy”.

Citing the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Esha Bhattacharjee V/s. Managing Committee…, the bench reiterated that the “conduct, behaviour, and attitude of a party relating to negligence, dilatory tactics are significant factors”.

Finding that the applicants were “casual, not serious and has preferred the appeal with an inordinate delay with dilatory tactics” ²¹, the Tribunal ruled that condoning the delay would “frustrate all the efforts taken by the allottees painstakingly since 2021”.

The Miscellaneous Application (No. 474 of 2025) was rejected. As a consequence, the main Appeal (No. AT00600453 of 2025) was also “disposed of” as non-surviving^.

^{Click Here to Read and Download The Order} 

Published in public interest by:

Adv. Sulaiman Bhimani

Citizens Justice Forum | The Law Suits

413, Golden Chambers, Opp. Tanishq Showroom,

Near Lower Oshiwara Metro Station, Andheri West, Mumbai – 400053

+91-8928372392 | adv.bhimani@gmail.com