11 sa 394 of 2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.394 OF 2026 Mahesh Shrikrishna More and Anr. ... Appellants versus Om Saath Realties LLP … Respondent Mr. Amin Shukla i/by Mr. Anil D’Souza, for Appellants. Ms. Rupali Ahire i/by Mr. G.D.Talreja, for Respondent. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 2 SEPTEMBER 2026 ORAL ORDER : 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. The challenge in this appeal is to an order dated 13 March 2026 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, in Misc. Application No.819 of 2025. By the said application, the Appellants – allottees sought a direction to deposit the pending balance amount as per the Agreement for Sale in the Tribunal and, thereupon, direct the Promoter to handover immediate possession of the flat in question. 3. The Tribunal was not persuaded to accede to the submission on behalf fo the Appellants – allottees, as the Tribunal was of the view that the allottees were under obligation to pay the balance consideration and statutory charges and taxes before the Promoter could be compelled to deliver possession of the apartment. 4. Learned Counsel for the Appellants invited attention of the Court to a SSP 1/2 2026:BHC-AS:36130 11 sa 394 of 2026.doc stipulation in the offer letter that the complainant had filed proceedings before the Authority and the complainant would be entitled to the delivery of possession after the said complaint was disposed. It was, thus, submitted that the offer of delivery of possession was conditional. 5. It is a matter of fact that the Appellants have not paid the balance consideration, statutory charges and taxes to the Promoter. In view of the provisions contained in Section 19(6) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the allottee is also under obligation to make the payment/s in accordance with the terms of the agreement. Offer to deposit the amount before the Tribunal was rightly considered by the Tribunal as not a complete discharge of the statutory obligation of the allottee. 6. In these circumstances, no question of law arises for consideration. 7. So far as the submission on behalf of the Appellants that the Appellants still willing to make payment to the Promoter, as the Appeal is still pending before the Appellate Tribunal, upon making payment of the due amount in accordance with the terms of the agreement between the parties, the Appellants can file an appropriate application before the Appellate Tribunal seeking directions for the delivery of possession of the subject apartment. 8. Subject to the aforesaid clarification, the Second Appeal stands dismissed. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. ) SSP 2/2 Signed by: S.S.Phadke Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 03/09/2026 11:51:44