Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 NOVEMBER 2017

Maha RERA Conditionally Withdraws Office Order On Co-Promoter

Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Contributor
Khaitan & Co.

Khaitan & Co.

Founded in 1911, Khaitan & Co is a heritage law firm that has been a trusted adviser to leading...

View firm profile
Explore more from Khaitan & Co.

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (the Maha RERA or the Authority) had vide its circular dated 11 May 2017 bearing Reference No RERA/LA/32/2017 (Co‑Promoter Order) defined the term "Co‑Promoter".

IndiaReal Estate and Construction
Sudip Mullick
Sudip Mullick
Devendra Deshmukh
Devendra Deshmukh
Harsh Parikh
Harsh Parikh
Author LinkedIn connections

The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (the Maha RERA or the Authority) had vide its circular dated 11 May 2017 bearing Reference No RERA/LA/32/2017 (Co‑Promoter Order) defined the term "Co‑Promoter".

Maha RERA in the Co-Promoter Order clarified that as The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act) does not define the word Co‑Promoter, it is defining it as per the powers vested in it by virtue of Regulation No 38 of the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (General) Regulations 2017.

Definition of Co-Promoter as per the Co-Promoter Order

"Co-Promoter means and includes any person(s) or organisation(s) who, under any agreement or arrangement with the promoter of a Real Estate Project is allotted or entitled to a share of total revenue generated from sale of apartments or share of the total area developed in the real estate project. The liabilities of such Co-Promoters shall be as per the agreement or arrangement with the

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Litigation Update | Supreme Court Upholds Occupants' Rights In Redevelopment Projects, Reinstates Mhada Orders For Permanent Alternate Accommodation

The Supreme Court of India has delivered a landmark ruling in a redevelopment dispute, firmly establishing that Permanent Alternate Accommodation Agreements executed under the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act are statutory instruments, not mere private contracts. This decision addresses critical questions about developer obligations, occupant rights, and regulatory authority when redevelopment projects fail to honor commitments made to original tenants.
IndiaReal Estate and Construction
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Mansukhlal Hiralal & Company
Article

Ministry Of Labour And Employment Operationalises The Provisions On Payment Of Statutory Bonus

On 25 August 2026, the Ministry of Labour and Employment issued two notifications (Notifications) under the Code on Wages, 2019 (Wage Code), thereby operationalising specified provisions relating to payment of statutory bonus for establishments for which the appropriate government is the Central Government. The Wage Code consolidates the legislative framework governing wages and related employee entitlements, including the regime previously governed by the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965.
IndiaEmployment and HR
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability Of SARFAESI Remedies For A Secured Creditor Who Acquires An NPA From A Non-notified NBFC

In Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v Trupti Sanjay Mehta and Others, 2026 INSC 943 (Kotak Mahindra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India considered whether a bank as defined under Section 2(1)(c) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) could invoke the provisions of the SARFAESI Act to recover a secured debt acquired from an entity which was not covered under the ambit of the SARFAESI Act at the time of disbursement of the loan.
IndiaFinance and Banking
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

Punjab And Haryana High Court Strikes Down JAO - FAO Retrospective Amendment As Unconstitutional

The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) in Jyoti Sareen vs. UOI & Others (CWP No. 15791-2024 (O&M)) (Order) held the retrospective amendments carried out vide the Finance Act, 2026, with respect to the powers of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to issue a reopening notice under section 148 (Reopening Notice) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (IT Act), as unconstitutional, being violative of the ‘doctrine of separation of powers’ and thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

DOT Notifies Telecom Network Authorisation Rules, 2026: What Has Changed?

On 20 July 2026, the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) notified the Telecommunications (Authorisation for Telecommunication Network) Rules, 2026 (Rules). The Rules operationalise Section 3(1)(b) of the Telecommunications Act, 2023 and establish a framework for six categories of telecommunication network authorisations: infrastructure provider (IP) (formerly, IP-I), digital connectivity infrastructure provider (DCIP), internet exchange point (IXP) provider, satellite earth station gateway (SESG) provider, cloud-hosted telecommunication network (CTN) provider and mobile number portability (MNP) provider.
IndiaMedia, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.