BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY MUMBAI SUO MOTO COMPLAINT NO : 10/2018 Secretary, MahaRERA Versus Parinee Buitding Properties MahaRERA Reg. No: P51800001334 Parinee Essence Coram: Shri Gautam Chatterjee, Hon'bte Chairperson Order 6thMarch 2018 1. Section 11(2) of the Reat Estate (Regutation and Development) Act, 2016, states that 'The advertisement or prospectus issued or pubtished by the promoter shatl mention prominentty the website address of the Authority, wherein att detaits of the registered project have been entered and inctude the registration number obtained from the Authority and such other matters incidentaI thereto' 2. With a view to having uniformity, MahaRERA had through scrotls on its website httDs: / / maharera. mahaon[ine .qov.in and also by sending emaits, informed atl the promoters of registered project, the manner MahaRERA Regn No. and MahaRERA website address shoutd be dlsptayed in various advertisements or brochures made by registered promoters. 3. ln spite of the same, it has come to the notice of MahaRERA that the aforementioned promoter has pubtished an advertisement in the newspaper Times of India, Mumbai saturday dated 20th January, 2018. The mentioned advertisement has prima facie viotated the section 11 (2) of the Act by not mentioning the website address of MahaRERA. 4. Taking suo moto cognizance of the matter, the promoter was catted upon on 6th March 2018, by a notice, to exptain why they shoutd not be penatized for the atteged viotation of the provisions of the Act. 5. On the date of the hearing, the promoter appeared and was represented by their advocate. They accepted that the atteged viotations of the provisions of the Act are totalty inadvertent and they did not have any intention to show non-comptiance towards the provisions of the Act or rutes or regu[ations made there under. They offered unconditional apotogy and requested of not imposing any penatty for the atteged violation. They have further provided an undertaking that no such violation of the Act woutd happen in the future and the promoter witt strictly comply with the provisions of the Act, rutes, regutations and orders/ circulars issued there under. 1/2 6. Section 61 of the Act states: lf any promoter contravenes any other provisions of this Act, other than that provided under section 3 or section 4, or the rutes or regutations made thereunder, he shatt be tiabte to a penatty which may extend up to five per cent. of the estimated cost of the reat estate project as determined by the Authority. 7. MahaRERA accepts the contention of the promoter that the aforesaid viotations of the provisions of the Act have happened unintentionalty. Therefore, only a token penatty, under the provisions of section 61 of the Act, is imposed and the Promoter is hereby directed to pay a penalty of Rs 2,00,000/ - (Rupees two takh onty) and further warned to ensure that such viotation is not repeated in future. Chatterjee) Chai , MahaRERA 717