The doctrine of forum conveniens applies in determining the appropriate forum for hearing a dispute, considering the convenience and hardship faced by the parties involved.

JUDGMENT

MAKARAND SUBHASH KARNIK, J. - Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the legality and propriety of the impugned order dated 7/4/2021 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal ( 'the Tribunal ' for short) in Miscellaneous Application No. 193 of 2021 for waiver of pre deposit of the amount in the appeal fled against the order dated 16/10/2019 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority ( 'the Authority ' for short).

2. The petitioner M/s. Hagwood Commercial Developers Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'developer ' for short), proposed to develop a registered project in the name and style of 'Prozone Palms ' at Nagpur. The developer owns around 42 acres of land at Nagpur. The developer proposed to develop approximately 400 residential apartments in fve towers on 3.5 acres portion of the said land. After obtaining all relevant permissions, the construction of the residential project started. The respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as 'fat purchaser ' for short) approached the developer in and around May, 2015 and booked fat No. 1202 admeasuring 140..9 s.ft. carpet area, located on 12th foor of proposed Tower 'Pallazio ' of 'Prozone Palms ' for consideration of Rs.77, 49, 675/-.

3. The fat purchaser alleges delay on the part of developer in completing the project due to deliberate non compliance of the obligations on his part. The allegations of the developer are otherwise. Developer says the delay has resulted because of failure on part of the fat purchaser to make necessary payments as per agreed payment schedule.

4. . The fall out resulted in a complaint under Section 31 of the the Real Estate (Regulations and Developments) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act ' for short) read with Rule 6 of the Maharashtra Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (Recovery of Interest, Penalty, Compensation, Fine Payable, forms of complaints and appeal etc.) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said rules ' for short) fled before the Maharashtra RERA Authority under the provisions of the said Act.

5. By an order dated 16/10/2019, the 'Authority ' held that the fat purchaser is entitled to get refund of consideration amount of Rs.64, 97, 956/- and the reimbursement of registration charges and taxes with simple interest at the rate of 10.4% from the dates of their payment till they are refunded / reimbursed. Cost of Rs.20, 000/- was awarded to the fat purchaser.

6. The order of the authority was challenged by the developer before the Tribunal by way of an appeal under Section 43 of the said Act. A Miscellaneous Application for waiver of the amount directed to be refunded was fled in the appeal. By the impugned order dated 7/4/2021 the Miscellaneous Application No. 193 of 2021 for waiver was dismissed by the Tribunal. The developer was directed to deposit entire amount as per the authority 's order in compliance of proviso to Section 43(5) of the said Act before 4/5/2021. The Tribunal 's order was challenged before this Court by way of a Second Appeal. The Second Appeal was allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to file the Petition. This Petition challenging the impugned order is accordingly fled. During the pendency of this Petition, the appeal was dismissed for non compliance by an order dated 26/7/2021. The dismissal is also challenged by consequential amendments.

7. An objection is raised by the fat purchaser 's counsel Mr. Chauhan that having regard to the principle of "Forum Conveniens ", that though the Petition is maintainable at the Principal Seat, the same should not be entertained and instead the Petition be returned for presenting the same before the Nagpur Bench of this Court for disposal on merits. The submissions of learned counsel for the fat purchaser are :

"(a) The 'Authority ' as well as the Tribunal being statutory Forum under the provisions of the said Act and Rules framed th