Non-payment of transit rent or alternative accommodation in case of redevelopment project as per the redevelopment agreement amounts to cheating and is a matter of a criminal nature, the observation was made by the Metropolitan Magistrate court in Mulund while asking the Navghar police to investigate the complaint against Richa Realtors and its office bearers along with others.
The court was hearing a complaint filed in January 2024 by a 62-year-old man Baban S Gorgavkar, a resident of Mulund against 26 parties, including Richa Realtors’ officials, MHADA representatives, and members of the PMGP Cooperative Housing Society. In total, 47 persons, including Gorgavkar, approached the court to voice their grievances against the builder.
Gorgavkar alleged that Richa Realtors, in collaboration with MHADA, began the redevelopment of their building in 2007, with an agreement signed on September 30, 2010. According to Gorgavkar, the agreement stipulated that the developer would provide rent or alternative accommodation until the residents were given possession of their new homes. He asserted that he is a legal owner of one of the flats, and that an agreement was signed, along with the establishment of an account for depositing the rent. However, residents claimed that some never received rent payments, while others faced delays.
The group had initially approached the Navghar police with a complaint in August 2023, but the police failed to register the case. Consequently, Gorgavkar sought the court’s intervention to have the case officially registered.
In reviewing the complaint, the court noted, “It prima facie appears that the accused has committed a non-bailable and cognisable offence.”
The court further observed, “Considering the facts and documents presented in the application, it appears there was an agreement to provide rent or transit accommodation to the applicant/flat owner during the redevelopment period. However, the accused failed to pay the rent. A review of the application and the redevelopment agreement makes it clear that the provision of transit accommodation/rent was part of the agreement. According to the applicant, the accused failed to provide the promised accommodation or rent and did not comply with the terms of the agreement.”
The court subsequently directed the police to investigate the complaint against the developer and the other parties involved.
