Runwal is quoting 16500 psf for its project in lokhandwala andheri west . This is for project Elegante.
Is it a good buy? Should we wait further ? Any suggestions pls
Read more
Reply
38 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Runwal has just given Ad in TOI about 25:75 Scheme . Pay 25 % now and balance on possession. Can you some one share the latest rate for this property? Also if this would be a good buy?
    CommentQuote
  • Experts - Need your help ...Please suggest
    CommentQuote
  • are there any updates on this project? any feedback for runwal builder?
    CommentQuote
  • Pay only 20 % & next installment after 24 months !!! Special offer for "runwal elegante" limited offer!!

    Hello All,

    I got an email from Runwal to say this the latest offer. Anyone heard about it? Do you know what rates they are quoting?

    Wanted to get some information before I talk to the sales person.

    Thanks!!
    CommentQuote
  • Saw an advertisement saying flexible payment; no home loan required. Any idea about this new offer from Runwal? Want to get expert opinion before speaking to the sales person.
    CommentQuote
  • Non-Compliance and Non-adherence of RERA 2016 provisions by M/s. Runwal Developers in reference to their project ‘Runwal Elegante’


    https://wakeupindia-designer.blogspot.com/2017/10/non-compliance-non-adherence-of-rera.html


    Open Letter to Gautam Chaterjee

    07th October, 2017

    To,

    Shri Gautam Chatterjee,

    Hon’ble Chairman,

    Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority,
    3rd Floor, A-Wing, Slum Rehabilitation Authority,
    Administrative Building, Anant Kanekar Marg,
    Bandra (E),

    Mumbai 400 051


    Dear Sir,

    Sub: Non-Compliance and Non-adherence of RERA 2016 provisions by M/s. Runwal Developers in reference to their project ‘Runwal Elegante’


    At the outset, we are in gratitude to you and your team on the immense work already executed under MahaRERA and thus we continue to reiterate our faith in your authority.

    We would like to bring to your notice, the unscrupulous and ill-conceived actions by one M/s. Runwal Developers Builders having their registered office at Runwal and Omkar Esquare , 5th Floor, Eastern Express Highway, Sion (East), Mumbai – 400 022, (herein referred to as the ‘said developers’) who has several on-going projects in Mumbai and elsewhere in Maharashtra, but is not registering the same under MahaRERA, trying various disguises and camouflage by using words and terminology to his benefit, but which results in grave disadvantage to the innocent flat purchasers, thus defeating the very purpose of MahaRERA .

    One of their projects is ‘Runwal Elegante’ registered as P 518 0000 3620 on the MahaRERA website, which actually comprises of Wing A, Wing B and Wing C, bearing Survey No.41 (Part) and New CTS. No. 620/B , 620/C and 620/D admeasuring 21,023 sq.mtrs situate lying and being at Village Oshiwara, Near Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 058 (Herein referred to as “said premise”)


    We would like to highlight some of the deceitful methods used by M/s. Runwal Developers to avoid registration of their project and thus cheating and deceiving the flat purchasers, inspite of the implementation of RERA 2016.

    (1) Unscrupulous and deceitful tactics employed to avoid registration of their projects: Even though MahaRERA is active and in force, in Maharashtra, M/s. Runwal Developers is forcing home buyers to take possession in the under- construction ‘said premise’ part of which is still under ‘Part Occupancy Certificate’. This building project is grossly incomplete having hardly any amenities ready, which are promised and agreed upon by the ‘said developers’, under the ‘Registered Agreements’ with flat – purchasers. Thus, the ‘said developer’ is stating white lies by implying that ‘Part Occupancy’ is as good as the completion certificate. By this, the ‘said developer’ is totally avoiding the registration of their full project under MahaRERA.


    (2). The ‘said developer’, project, ‘Runwal Elegante’, in Andheri West comprises three Wings A, Wing B and Wing C. But the builder has registered only Wing A, terming it as ‘Tower A’, under MahaRERA, while conveniently showing Wing B and C as ‘Completed projects naming them as ‘Tower B and Tower C’. The ‘said developer’ has used the terms ‘Tower A, Tower B and Tower C instead of ‘Wing A, Wing B and Wing C’ thus clearly mis-leading MahaRERA.


    Herein the builder has received ‘Part – Occupancy Certificate for Wing B and Wing C’, and thus using this as an excuse, the builder has registered only Wing A as Tower A, in MahaRERA and not registered Wing B and Wing C.


    Once again please note that the builder is using the term ‘Tower’ instead of ‘Wing’ in the MahaRERA website. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit A is the copy of the RERA Registration.

    (3). Thus the builder is breaking-up the project as ‘Phases’ and not registering the Wing B and Wing C under MahaRERA, while all three wings A , B and C are actually one and the same building. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit B is the copy of the layout which shows common podium, lobby and sky-lounge which interconnects all the three wings. By this deceitful method, he is now stating that he has received ‘Occupation Certificate’, and has released mis-leading advertisements in leading newspapers and hoardings all over Mumbai, saying ‘Full Occupation Received’. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit C is the copy of the mis-leading advertisement in Bombay Times dated Saturday July 22, 2017.

    (4). Using this, to his advantage, the ‘said developer’ is issuing letters to the innocent and helpless flat- purchasers saying that he has received ‘Occupation Certificate’ and that the flat- purchasers should take possession for fit-outs, habitation etc. and should therefore pay the balance amount under consideration as per the ‘Registered Agreements’, between the ‘said developer’ and flat – purchasers.

    This clearly exposes the wrongful methods employed by the ‘said developer’, and imposing undue pressure and duress onto the flat – purchaser to pay the full 100% of the consideration.


    (5). Thus the Builder is clearly confusing flat purchasers and MahaRERA by assuming and considering Part Occupancy as Completion certificate and this avoiding the Registration of the building project altogether, and at the same time pressurizing the flat purchasers to pay additional money in a project which is nowhere near completion.

    Thus, it is very clear that the ‘said developer’ has not received the Full Occupation Certificate and he has also not registered the project under MahaRERA.

    (6). We hereby request you to make note of some exemplary Laws:


    SEC. 1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY 13

    (4) The promoter shall— (b) be responsible to obtain the completion certificate or the occupancy certificate, or both, as applicable, from the relevant competent authority as per local laws or other laws for the time being in force and to make it available to the allottees individually or to the association of allottees, as the case may be; there is no provision of part OC in RERA


    SEC. 1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY 5

    (zd) "Member" means the member of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority appointed under section 21 and includes the Chairperson;

    (ze) "notification" means a notification published in the Official Gazette and the expression "notify" shall be construed accordingly;

    (zf) "occupancy certificate" means the occupancy certificate, or such other certificate by whatever name called, issued by the competent authority permitting occupation of any building, as provided under local laws, which has provision for civic infrastructure such as water, sanitation and electricity; ​

    Thus the ‘said developer’, is clearly sticking to his bad old ways, even though MahaRERA makes it mandatory for him to register all under construction and ongoing projects’


    (7). The ‘said developer’ is pressurizing the flat purchasers to pay the balance consideration amount, threatening them about ‘terminating their registered agreements and in many cases even ‘terminating the registered agreements’. By making false statements, releasing mis-leading advertisements, hiding crucial facts the ‘said developer’ is thus creating gross criminal and civil offences.

    (8). Mr. Chatterjee, please take immediate cognizance of this dishonest and deceitful developer M/s. Runwal Developers, who is taking undue advantage of words and terms and thus confusing the MahaRERA authorities, flat- purchasers and the general public at large and acting against several provisions of MahaRERA and other laws in force.

    We request you to take prompt, stringent and immediate action, investigate the matter and penalize M/s. Runwal Develoeprs.

    Your actions always speak louder than your words and it’s time the builder lobby heard this especially Ms/ Runwal Developers, and complied with the MahaRERA provisions which are mandatory and compulsory.

    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by yogeshraja
    Non-Compliance and Non-adherence of RERA 2016 provisions by M/s. Runwal Developers in reference to their project ‘Runwal Elegante’


    https://wakeupindia-designer.blogspot.com/2017/10/non-compliance-non-adherence-of-rera.html


    Open Letter to Gautam Chaterjee

    07th October, 2017

    To,

    Shri Gautam Chatterjee,

    Hon’ble Chairman,

    Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority,
    3rd Floor, A-Wing, Slum Rehabilitation Authority,
    Administrative Building, Anant Kanekar Marg,
    Bandra (E),

    Mumbai 400 051


    Dear Sir,

    Sub: Non-Compliance and Non-adherence of RERA 2016 provisions by M/s. Runwal Developers in reference to their project ‘Runwal Elegante’


    At the outset, we are in gratitude to you and your team on the immense work already executed under MahaRERA and thus we continue to reiterate our faith in your authority.

    We would like to bring to your notice, the unscrupulous and ill-conceived actions by one M/s. Runwal Developers Builders having their registered office at Runwal and Omkar Esquare , 5th Floor, Eastern Express Highway, Sion (East), Mumbai – 400 022, (herein referred to as the ‘said developers’) who has several on-going projects in Mumbai and elsewhere in Maharashtra, but is not registering the same under MahaRERA, trying various disguises and camouflage by using words and terminology to his benefit, but which results in grave disadvantage to the innocent flat purchasers, thus defeating the very purpose of MahaRERA .

    One of their projects is ‘Runwal Elegante’ registered as P 518 0000 3620 on the MahaRERA website, which actually comprises of Wing A, Wing B and Wing C, bearing Survey No.41 (Part) and New CTS. No. 620/B , 620/C and 620/D admeasuring 21,023 sq.mtrs situate lying and being at Village Oshiwara, Near Lokhandwala Complex, Andheri (West), Mumbai – 400 058 (Herein referred to as “said premise”)


    We would like to highlight some of the deceitful methods used by M/s. Runwal Developers to avoid registration of their project and thus cheating and deceiving the flat purchasers, inspite of the implementation of RERA 2016.

    (1) Unscrupulous and deceitful tactics employed to avoid registration of their projects: Even though MahaRERA is active and in force, in Maharashtra, M/s. Runwal Developers is forcing home buyers to take possession in the under- construction ‘said premise’ part of which is still under ‘Part Occupancy Certificate’. This building project is grossly incomplete having hardly any amenities ready, which are promised and agreed upon by the ‘said developers’, under the ‘Registered Agreements’ with flat – purchasers. Thus, the ‘said developer’ is stating white lies by implying that ‘Part Occupancy’ is as good as the completion certificate. By this, the ‘said developer’ is totally avoiding the registration of their full project under MahaRERA.


    (2). The ‘said developer’, project, ‘Runwal Elegante’, in Andheri West comprises three Wings A, Wing B and Wing C. But the builder has registered only Wing A, terming it as ‘Tower A’, under MahaRERA, while conveniently showing Wing B and C as ‘Completed projects naming them as ‘Tower B and Tower C’. The ‘said developer’ has used the terms ‘Tower A, Tower B and Tower C instead of ‘Wing A, Wing B and Wing C’ thus clearly mis-leading MahaRERA.


    Herein the builder has received ‘Part – Occupancy Certificate for Wing B and Wing C’, and thus using this as an excuse, the builder has registered only Wing A as Tower A, in MahaRERA and not registered Wing B and Wing C.


    Once again please note that the builder is using the term ‘Tower’ instead of ‘Wing’ in the MahaRERA website. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit A is the copy of the RERA Registration.

    (3). Thus the builder is breaking-up the project as ‘Phases’ and not registering the Wing B and Wing C under MahaRERA, while all three wings A , B and C are actually one and the same building. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit B is the copy of the layout which shows common podium, lobby and sky-lounge which interconnects all the three wings. By this deceitful method, he is now stating that he has received ‘Occupation Certificate’, and has released mis-leading advertisements in leading newspapers and hoardings all over Mumbai, saying ‘Full Occupation Received’. Hereto annexed and marked as Exhibit C is the copy of the mis-leading advertisement in Bombay Times dated Saturday July 22, 2017.

    (4). Using this, to his advantage, the ‘said developer’ is issuing letters to the innocent and helpless flat- purchasers saying that he has received ‘Occupation Certificate’ and that the flat- purchasers should take possession for fit-outs, habitation etc. and should therefore pay the balance amount under consideration as per the ‘Registered Agreements’, between the ‘said developer’ and flat – purchasers.

    This clearly exposes the wrongful methods employed by the ‘said developer’, and imposing undue pressure and duress onto the flat – purchaser to pay the full 100% of the consideration.


    (5). Thus the Builder is clearly confusing flat purchasers and MahaRERA by assuming and considering Part Occupancy as Completion certificate and this avoiding the Registration of the building project altogether, and at the same time pressurizing the flat purchasers to pay additional money in a project which is nowhere near completion.

    Thus, it is very clear that the ‘said developer’ has not received the Full Occupation Certificate and he has also not registered the project under MahaRERA.

    (6). We hereby request you to make note of some exemplary Laws:


    SEC. 1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY 13

    (4) The promoter shall— (b) be responsible to obtain the completion certificate or the occupancy certificate, or both, as applicable, from the relevant competent authority as per local laws or other laws for the time being in force and to make it available to the allottees individually or to the association of allottees, as the case may be; there is no provision of part OC in RERA


    SEC. 1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY 5

    (zd) "Member" means the member of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority appointed under section 21 and includes the Chairperson;

    (ze) "notification" means a notification published in the Official Gazette and the expression "notify" shall be construed accordingly;

    (zf) "occupancy certificate" means the occupancy certificate, or such other certificate by whatever name called, issued by the competent authority permitting occupation of any building, as provided under local laws, which has provision for civic infrastructure such as water, sanitation and electricity; ​

    Thus the ‘said developer’, is clearly sticking to his bad old ways, even though MahaRERA makes it mandatory for him to register all under construction and ongoing projects’


    (7). The ‘said developer’ is pressurizing the flat purchasers to pay the balance consideration amount, threatening them about ‘terminating their registered agreements and in many cases even ‘terminating the registered agreements’. By making false statements, releasing mis-leading advertisements, hiding crucial facts the ‘said developer’ is thus creating gross criminal and civil offences.

    (8). Mr. Chatterjee, please take immediate cognizance of this dishonest and deceitful developer M/s. Runwal Developers, who is taking undue advantage of words and terms and thus confusing the MahaRERA authorities, flat- purchasers and the general public at large and acting against several provisions of MahaRERA and other laws in force.

    We request you to take prompt, stringent and immediate action, investigate the matter and penalize M/s. Runwal Develoeprs.

    Your actions always speak louder than your words and it’s time the builder lobby heard this especially Ms/ Runwal Developers, and complied with the MahaRERA provisions which are mandatory and compulsory.



    Send the details to Maharera.helpdesk@gmail.com, they will definitely take action...
    CommentQuote
  • When MahaRERA can't do much about a project
    The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority will not entertain complaints against a project if it has received part occupation certificate, even if the document has been issued by mistake, the housing regulator has said. This is so because such buildings need not register and MahaRERA's jurisdiction is limited to only ongoing projects...

    Prasad Patkar filed a complaint to contend that he booked Flat No. 104 on the 1st floor in Tower-B of "Runwal Elegante" at Lokhanwala Complex, Oshiwara, Andheri (West). This project consists of A, B and C towers and is a single project. The developer has registered only Tower-A with MahaRERA as ongoing project. For the other two towers, the developer said that they have received part occupancy certificate for the structures. Patkar complained that even Tower B and C are not complete.

    The developer had sent letters asking the complainant to pay the balance amount of consideration and the complainant in turn asked the developer to furnish the approvals and permissions. The complainant said the builder wrote to him saying he would be charged interest for failing to clear the payment on time.

    On September 20, 2017, the developer informed Patkar that they have terminated his agreement for his failure to pay the remaining installments. He was also informed that the initial payments would forfeited.

    These matter was heard by a full bench to consider the issue of their maintainability. The advocate for the complainant admitted that the flat booked by the complainant is in Tower-B and the part occupancy certificate in respect of Tower-B has been issued. He also said that the said OCs had been issued wrongly. The developer's lawyer contended that since the OCs have been issued in respect of B and C towers, they are not registered with MahaRERA.

    The full bench of the authority held, "From the facts and circumstances disclosed in the complaints themselves, it becomes clear that the flats of the complainants are in Tower-B for which occupancy certificate has been issued by the competent authority. Whether it is issued properly or improperly by the said authority is not the issue which can be gone into by MahaRERA especially when the Complainant has approached the proper forum in this regard."

    Dismissing the complaint, MahaRERA said, "As per Section 3 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act,2O16, the ongoing projects which have received the completion certificate do not require registration. In the light of these provisions when the part occupancy certificate in respect of B and C Towers has been received by the developer, they have rightly not registered those two towers and registered only Tower A which is incomplete.

    MahaRera gets jurisdiction to entertain only those complaints which relate to a registered project. So far as the locus standi of the Complainants is concerned, their flats are situated in Tower B which is not registered with MahaRERA, therefore, MahaRERA does not get jurisdiction to entertain his complaints. They are not maintainable."


    http://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-when-maharera-can-t-do-much-about-a-project-2564655
    CommentQuote