Booked in 2011, No Agreement Till 2026: Bombay HC Orders Registration in Four Weeks

On January 15, 2011, two buyers booked a flat in a project then called Rising City in Ghatkopar and got a holding receipt for Rs 1,35,72,000. Three years later an allotment letter followed, for a different flat. The parties eventually agreed the buyers had paid Rs 38,47,247, more than 30 percent of the allotment price. What they never got, in all those years, was a registered agreement for sale.

On October 13, 2026, the Bombay High Court gave the promoter four weeks to execute and register one. The judgment, in Rare Townships Pvt. Ltd. v. Archana Y. A. Upadhyay, Second Appeal No. 258 of 2026, was delivered by Justice N. J. Jamadar. It matters to every Mumbai buyer who has paid a large sum on the strength of a receipt or an allotment letter alone.

The short answer. The High Court disposed of the promoter's second appeal with directions: the agreement must conform to Section 13 of the RERA Act and the model form under Rule 10(1) of the Maharashtra RERA Rules, 2017, and be executed and registered within four weeks of October 13, 2026, with a possession date of October 4, 2024 written in. That date is tentative and subject to the Appellate Tribunal's final decision, and the allottees' claims for interest and compensation remain open there. The trade-off: the buyers finally get a registered agreement, but only after 15 years, and the possession date in it can still change.

How did a 2011 booking reach the High Court in 2026?

Step by step, according to the judgment. The holding receipt of January 15, 2011 was for Flat B-706, 1,200 square feet with one parking space. An allotment letter was later issued for Flat No. 805 in Building A-1, measuring 1,103.01 square feet, for Rs 1,24,80,000. The Tribunal's review order corrected its date to November 30, 2014. After RERA came into force, the project was registered as North Sea Heights (A-1).

Clause 10 of the allotment letter said the building would be completed within 42 months from the start of construction or the grant of the commencement certificate, subject to force majeure. The commencement certificate came on October 1, 2016. MahaRERA computed an expected possession date of April 4, 2023 and extended it to October 4, 2024, relying on Section 8(b) of MOFA and the COVID-19 extension.

The allottees filed their complaint on May 5, 2024, alleging failure to execute a registered agreement, complete the project and deliver possession. No registered agreement for sale had been executed at any point.

What did MahaRERA and the Tribunal order?

MahaRERA, by its order of July 2, 2025, directed the promoter to execute a registered agreement within 30 days in line with Section 13, held that the termination of the allotment was improper and illegal under Section 13, and directed interest for delayed possession under Section 18 from October 4, 2024 until an offer of possession with the occupation certificate, on the amount actually paid. The promoter did not challenge that order.

The allottees appealed. On November 26, 2025, the Appellate Tribunal allowed their interim application with a set of directions, corrected later on review on April 16, 2026.

What did the promoter argue, and what did the High Court decide?

The promoter argued that the Tribunal's interim order effectively decided the appeal, and that it fixed a possession date and barred interest without reasons. The allottees, who appeared in person, said no substantial question of law arose because the promoter had never appealed MahaRERA's order, which had become final against it.

The court found the direction to execute an agreement "legally impeccable." Noting that the allottees had paid more than 30 percent of the consideration, it said "the promoter could not have accepted the said amount without executing a registered agreement for sale." It also noted the MOFA framework that applied even before RERA. On the possession date, it said this "warrants adjudication at the final hearing of the Appeal," observing that MahaRERA had found the date extended to October 4, 2024 though its operative order did not state it.

The allottees had filed an affidavit on August 19, 2026 consenting to a definite possession date being fixed, without prejudice to their other claims. The court fixed October 4, 2024 as the date in the agreement, tentatively, and directed that if the Tribunal alters it, the parties will execute a deed of rectification.

The promoter had framed two substantial questions of law for the High Court: whether the Tribunal erred in passing interlocutory directions without reasons, and whether it erred in specifying the possession date without reasons. The court noted that the promoter had not challenged MahaRERA's order and had not filed a cross-objection in the allottees' appeal. It resolved the immediate dispute through the tentative date and the four-week timeline, and kept all other contentions open for the Tribunal.

Counting from October 13, 2026, four weeks runs to November 10, 2026. The direction is to execute and register the agreement within that period, so for these buyers the paper they waited for since 2011 is due within days of this article.

What does Section 13 of the RERA Act say?

Section 13(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 says a promoter shall not accept a sum more than ten percent of the cost of the apartment as an advance payment or application fee without first entering into a written agreement for sale and registering it. Section 13(2) requires the agreement to specify, among other things, the payment schedule, the date of possession, and the rates of interest payable by each side on default.

On the figures in this case, ten percent of the allotment price of Rs 1,24,80,000 is Rs 12,48,000. The allottees had paid Rs 38,47,247, about three times that, without a registered agreement. PropNewz explained what the agreement itself must contain in our guide to what a Section 13 agreement must say, and how delay interest works in our explainer on Section 18 refund or interest.

What is still undecided?

Most of the money questions. The allottees' appeal before the Tribunal continues, and the judgment lists what their affidavit kept open: the correct booking date, the amount paid, deviations from the model agreement, interest and compensation under Section 18, parking and amenities. The court said it need not decide the agreement's terms, which remain open before the Tribunal. The judgment does not state the interest rate MahaRERA applied, describing it only as the stipulated rate.

The possession date is also likely to remain contested. MahaRERA's extension to October 4, 2024 relied on Section 8(b) of MOFA and the COVID-19 extension, and the judgment does not set out the arithmetic behind each extension. The Tribunal's interim order had instead pointed to the allotment letter's date or, failing that, not more than three years from the allotment letter. Which approach prevails may affect how many months of delay interest, if any, the allottees can claim.

The judgment also records a discrepancy in the payment figures: the allottees' background figure was Rs 58,47,609, while the parties later agreed on Rs 38,47,247, the figure the Tribunal's review order adopted. Buyers in similar positions should keep their own payment ledger, with receipts, because figures can drift across years of proceedings.

What should a Mumbai buyer holding only a receipt or allotment letter do?

Treat the absence of a registered agreement as the first problem to fix, not a formality. Buyers comparing projects in the eastern suburbs, such as Prestige Place in Kanjurmarg, can apply the same checks before paying beyond the booking amount.

1. Before paying more than ten percent of the cost, insist on a registered agreement for sale.
2. Check that the agreement follows the state's model form and note every deviation.
3. Confirm the possession date in writing, and how any extension is to be computed.
4. Keep a dated ledger of every payment with receipts and bank records.
5. If a flat number or area changes, get the change recorded in writing with the price.
6. If the promoter delays the agreement, take it to MahaRERA, as these allottees did.
7. If an order goes in your favour, track whether the promoter appeals it, since the promoter's failure to appeal weighed in this case.

Frequently asked questions

What did the Bombay High Court order in Rare Townships v. Upadhyay?

On October 13, 2026, Justice N. J. Jamadar directed that a registered agreement conforming to Section 13 of the RERA Act and the Maharashtra model form be executed within four weeks, with October 4, 2024 as a tentative possession date, subject to the Appellate Tribunal's final decision on the allottees' pending appeal.

Why did the court say the promoter needed a registered agreement?

The allottees had paid Rs 38,47,247, more than 30 percent of the Rs 1,24,80,000 price. Section 13(1) bars a promoter from accepting more than ten percent as advance without a registered agreement, and the court said the promoter could not have accepted that amount without one.

Is the October 4, 2024 possession date final?

No. The court called it tentative and without prejudice to both sides, said the possession date warrants adjudication at the final hearing, and directed a deed of rectification if the Tribunal alters it. Interest and compensation under Section 18 also remain open before the Tribunal.

What should a buyer with only an allotment letter do?

Insist on a registered agreement before paying more than ten percent of the cost, check it against the model form, confirm the possession date in writing and keep a dated payment ledger. If the promoter delays the agreement, approach MahaRERA, as these allottees did.

Last updated 2026-11-06. PropNewz Team.