Q. I have filed a complaint in MahaRERA against a builder who had promised a flat to me in December 2018 and for which there is a registered agreement for sale. The builder has obtained extension of the project completion date from time to time, now extended to December 31, 2026, by MahaRERA without my consent. I have filed a complaint under Sec 18 of RERA seeking early possession and interest/compensation for delay. When the matter came up, both parties were advised to explore settlement through the MahaRERA Conciliation Forum, and the matter is now referred to the Conciliation Bench. I want to know: (A) Is it advisable to go for conciliation? (B) What is the procedure before the Conciliation Bench? (C) Can my advocate argue on my behalf or must I appear in person? (D) Is any additional fee payable for conciliation or to conciliators? (E) If conciliation succeeds, are the consent terms binding? (F) If the builder does not comply, will I need to file a fresh complaint? —– Francis Machado, Chembur
A. Conciliation under MahaRERA is pursuant to section 32(g) of the RERA Act, 2016 and forms part of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) framework.
It is strongly encouraged by courts due to the delays, procedural complexities, and high costs associated with litigation. Conciliation offers a simpler, quicker, and more flexible approach to resolving disputes.
In conciliation proceedings, the conciliators do not adjudicate or determine legal rights and wrongs. Their role is to facilitate communication between the parties and assist them in reaching a mutually acceptable settlement.
The process is informal, confidential, and party-centric. Both the complainant and the respondent are expected to be present and actively participate, as the outcome depends on mutual understanding and agreement. Advocates are not barred from attending the proceedings.
However, their role is limited to assisting and advising their clients rather than arguing the case. The focus remains on constructive dialogue rather than adversarial submissions.
The parties themselves are expected to present their concerns, expectations, and possible solutions. Conciliators may also conduct private sessions with each party to better understand the underlying issues and help bridge differences.
If the conciliation is successful, the agreed terms are reduced to writing and signed by both parties. These consent terms are then forwarded to MahaRERA, which records them in the presence of the parties and passes an order accordingly.
Such a process ensures that the agreement is formalised and recognized by the authority. Conciliation is generally advisable as it carries minimal risk. The proceedings are confidential, and any discussions or proposals made during conciliation cannot be used as evidence if the process fails.
A successful conciliation avoids prolonged litigation, including appeals, adjournments, and associated expenses, saving both time and mental stress. It also promotes a cooperative resolution where both parties benefit.
When a matter is referred to conciliation by MahaRERA, no separate fee is payable by the parties for the process or to the conciliators, as the cost is borne by MahaRERA.
If the conciliation results in a settlement, the consent terms are legally binding under Sec 74 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Such a settlement has the same status as an arbitral award and is enforceable as a decree under Sec 36 of the Act.
In case the builder fails to comply with the agreed terms, it is not necessary to file a fresh complaint. Instead, the aggrieved party can initiate execution proceedings to enforce the MahaRERA order based on the consent terms.
(Advocate Shirish V Deshpande is chairman, Mumbai Grahak Panchayat. Queries can be sent to him on email: shirish50@yahoo.com)
the headline should contain To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/
