| 12-01-2024 |
|
2 |
Mr. Jagdesh Patel VS Skystar Builcon |
MREAT |
Booking amount refund |
10 % Forfeiture is illegal |
Link |
| 06-07-2023 |
P518000000882 |
AT 21153 |
Mahesh G. Chendvankar & Ors Vs Sheth Infraworld Pvt Ltd |
MahaREAT |
maintainability of appeal if complaint filed in form B and complainant himself disputed jurisdiction, calculation of delay in possession, entitlement of promoter to claim relaxation on account of COVID, correction in possession date without authorisation |
Interest from agreed date of possession if delay is not attributable to allottee, no deduction for COVID, not format but reliefs will determine jurisdiction, correction in possession date without initial of parties in registered agreement not valid, allottee can claim possession under protest pending appeal |
Link |
| 12-12-2021 |
All |
DB Civil WP No 13688/2021, SC - Civil Appeal (C) 1861-1871/2022 |
Union Bank of India Vs Rajasthan RERA |
Rajasthan High Court and Supreme Court |
status of bank/lender on assignment of rights of borrower in secured creditor by operation of law, conflict between RERA and SARAFAESI, jurisdiction of RERA, validity of Regulation9 |
Regulation 9 not invalid, RERA prevail over SARAFAESI, RERA would not apply to transaction where security interest created by mortggaing before RERA unless fraulent or collusive, RERA has jurisdiction if bank takes recourse to section 13(4) of SARAFESI. Supreme Court held that judgment will be applicable in case where proceedings initiated by allottee to protect rights |
Link |
| 11-11-2021 |
All |
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6745 Â 6749 OF 202 |
Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd Vs State of UP |
Supreme Court |
rights of allottee u/s 18 and 19, retroactive applicability of RERA, applicability of RERA, compliance u/s 43(5), authority to delegate u/s 81 to single member, jurisdiction of Regulatory Authority and Adjudicating Officer, complaint with composite prayers, segregation of composite prayers, AO power to issue recovery certificate u/s 40 |
allottee right u/s 18 and 19 and liability of promoter u/s 18 and 19 are unconditional absolute unqualified regardless of unforeseen events or court orders not attributable to allottee, RERA applies to ongoing incomplete project after registration, RERA retroactive in nature, compliance u/s 43(5) mandatory, single member can decide complaint if delegated u/s 81, interest and violation matters can be decided only by Regulatory Authority, compensation matters can be decided only by Adjudicating Officer, old composite prayers shall be segregated at appropriate stage, new complaints to be filed separately for interest and compensation, authority to decide complaint by summary inquiry based on undisputed documents, amount directed by Adjudicating Officer recoverable u/s 40 |
Link |
| 07-11-2019 |
All |
AT 10792 10793 |
Mantri Dwellings Pvt Ltd Vs Rajesh Saxena |
MahaREAT |
applicability of RERA if agreement having arbitration clause, jurisdiction, maintainability, can promoter decide whether to accept withdrawal or pay interest for delay |
Arbitration clause in agreement does not bar allottee from excercising statutory right u/s 18, promoter has no discretion to accept or reject demand of allottee to withdraw or ask interest for delay |
Link |
| 12-10-2018 |
All |
Review Petition (C) No.2629-2630 of 2020 |
Emmar MGF Land Ltd vs Aftab Singh |
Supreme Court |
Whether RERA prevail over Arbitration Act, whether section 79 of RERA bars allottee from initiating arbitration proceedings, whether arbiitration clause in agreement bars allottee from filing complaint under RERA |
RERA prevails over Arbitration Act, section 79 does not bars allottee from initiating aribtration proceedings, arbiitration clause in agreement allottee does not bar allottee from filing complaint under RERA, remedy u/s 18 is additional remedy without prejudice to any other remedy available |
Link |
| 12-06-2017 |
All |
WP 2737/2017 |
Neelkamal Realtors Suburban Pvt Ltd Vs UOI |
Bombay High Court |
Challenge to RERA |
RERA upheld as retroactive in nature |
Link |
| 12-05-2002 |
P51800003067 |
AT 10841 55491 |
Jyoti K Narang Vs CCI Projects Pvt Ltd |
MahaREAT |
Applicability of RERA if no agreement executed, whether allottee can claim refund based on allotment letter |
Allotment Letter containing important commercial terms is conclusive contract enforceable against promoter, RERA will apply even if agreement not executed, |
Link |
| 12-05-2000 |
10 |
gf |
dgb |
dgfdfg |
dfg |
dfg |
Link |
