Maharashtra State Consumer Commission Sentences Sterling Constructions Partners To 3-Year Jail In Flat Possession Case

Maharashtra State Consumer Commission Sentences Sterling Constructions Partners To 3-Year Jail In Flat Possession Case

The Maharashtra State Consumer Commission sentenced two Sterling Constructions partners to three years' imprisonment for failing to comply with orders directing flat possession and payment of interest to homebuyers in the Kurla Sterling Apartments project. The commission rejected the developers' defence and suspended the sentence for 30 days to allow an appeal.

Charul Shah JoshiUpdated: Friday, August 07, 2026, 11:22 PM IST
Maharashtra State Consumer Commission Sentences Sterling Constructions Partners To 3-Year Jail In Flat Possession Case
Maharashtra State Consumer Commission sentenced two Sterling Constructions partners to three years in jail for failing to comply with flat possession orders | AI Generated Representational Image

Mumbai, August 7, 2026: The state consumer commission has sentenced two partners of Sterling Constructions to three years’ imprisonment for non-compliance with its order passed in favour of flat purchasers, holding the firm guilty of deficiency in service.

The commission had allowed the application for non-execution of the order filed by the original complainant through advocate Ajay Pawar against the developers and had issued warrants against the partners.

Sentence Suspended For Appeal Period

Lawyers for the developers, Uday Wavikar and Sajira Jondhale, on Friday sought a stay to challenge the order. The commission has now suspended the sentence for the 30-day appeal period.

“The accused, after obtaining the full consideration amount of the flat, were not bothered to complete the construction and failed to hand over possession of the flat,” the commission observed.

Commission Rejects Developers’ Defence

The developers were held guilty of deficiency in service in three complaints. In one case, Avinash Butala booked a flat in Sterling Apartments in Kurla in 2006.

The building remained incomplete till 2013. In 2017, the developer was directed to deliver the flat and pay interest. The developers claimed that occupants refused to vacate part of the plot due to a dispute, delaying approval for the proposed building project.

Also Watch:

The commission noted that counsel for the accused argued that possession of the flat was not given due to regulatory changes and price escalation, which the complainants refused to accept.

However, the commission rejected the defence, observing that while price escalation was cited, the accused also claimed that the building would be completed after obtaining the commencement certificate from the authority. It said the defence was untenable.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/