IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Yashwant Varma, J.
Praveen Chhabra - Appellant
Versus
Real Estate Appellate Tribunal - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14552 of 2021
Decided On : 26-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks relief concerning project registrations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court discusses jurisdiction of the appellate tribunal. (Para 3 , 4 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 3. amicus argues against the appellate tribunal's powers. (Para 5 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. court examines powers and limitations of the tribunal and authority. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. court finds issues with appellate tribunal's injunction. (Para 24) |
| 6. court sets aside the impugned orders. (Para 25) |
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner who is a builder developer by profession has instituted these proceedings seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ, order and direction, directing the respondent to place on record all the necessary records pertaining to case titled (Suo Motu Case) REAT/0002/2021 titled as "Court of Its Own Motion Vs. Commissioners of all the Municipal Zones & Anrs.";
(b) Set aside and quash the orders and proceedings in respect of (Suo Motu Case) REAT/0002/2021 titled as "Court of Its Own Motion Vs. Commissioners of all the Municipal Zones & Anrs.";
(c) Set aside orders dated 24/11/2021 and 17/11/2021 passed by Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in (Suo Moto Case) REAT/0002/2021 titled as "Court of Its Own Motion vs. Commissioners of all the Municipal Zones & Anr.;"
2. In terms of the impugned orders, the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal [Appellate Tribunal] has drawn suo moto proceedings in respect of various residential and commercial projects and construction activity being undertaken in connection therewith in the National Capital Territory of Delhi and passed orders of restraint in terms noted hereinafter. The order of 17 November 2021 in terms of which proceedings were initiated records as follows:
"ORDER:
It has been mentioned before us that there are large number of projects under construction, falling within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal, where the mandatory provision for registration of project under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 has not been complied with. A number of projects have been mentioned at the Bar. However, we deem it necessary to further verify the details, before we name the properties herein.
Section 3 in Chapter 11 of the Act provides for Registration of a Real Estate Project Sub-section (1) of Section 3 stipulates that no promoter shall advertise, market, book, sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to purchase in any manner any plot, apartment or building, as the case may be, in any real estate project or part of it, in any planning area, without registering the real estate project with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority established under this Act. Sub Section (2) relates to the applicability of the Act - (a) where the area of land proposed to be developed exceeds five hundred square meters or the number of apartments proposed to be developed exceeds eight, inclusive of all phases. It has been submitted before us that despite the clarity of the provisions of the Act regarding their applicability, there is a rampant non-compliance of these provisions within the city.
The Registry of the Tribunal also points out that they had addressed a couple of communications to the Commissioner of Police seeking details of the FIRS registered in respect of societies/individuals offering membership of housing projects and fraudulently collecting huge amounts of money from the gullible buyers within the jurisdiction of Delhi and especially in areas falling under the land pooling policy initiated by the Delhi Development Authority. The details are stated to have not been received till date, despite lapse of considerable time and also a reminder.
Keeping in view the aforesaid background, it is considered appropriate that suo-moto proceedings are initiated in the matter to ensure that there is strict compliance of the provisions of the Act and that the gullible buyers are not left to be cheated by the unscrupulous persons operating in the construction b
The Appellate Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to initiate suo moto proceedings under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, as its powers are confined to reviewing appeals against the orders o....
Point of Law : Section 3(1) prescribes that no promoter shall advertise, sell or offer to sell, or invite persons to purchase any plot, apartment or building in any real estate project which is not r....
where there are two or more parties contesting each other's claim and the statutory authority is required to adjudicate the rival claims between the parties, such a statutory authority was held to be....
Section 35 deals with powers of authority to call for information and conduct investigation.
Section 36 deals with power to issue interim orders.
The jurisdiction of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was affirmed, directing adjudication of compensation claims based on statutory authority under RERA.
The High Court upheld that jurisdiction for RERA to adjudicate complaints exists even if the promoter lacks registration, emphasizing the rights of aggrieved parties under the Act.
The RERA Act excludes Civil Court jurisdiction for disputes covered under its provisions, rendering any injunction by the Civil Court a nullity.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.