Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
R.K. Pattanaik, J.
Arundhati Infratech Pvt.Ltd. Bhubaneswar & others - Appellants
Versus
Ashutosh Panda & others - Respondents
MSA No. 29 of 2025
Decided On : 08-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural issues regarding condonation of delay (Para 1) |
| 2. challenge to rera order and next steps (Para 2) |
| 3. grounds for delay in filing application (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 4. objection against condonation of delay raised (Para 5) |
| 5. court's order to allow condonation of delay (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER :
R.K. Pattanaik, J.
I.A. No.73 of 2025
1. Heard Mr. Mahanta, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. No notice is issued to respondent Nos. 2 & 3 in the I.A. as the same is dispensed with.
3. Instant appeal is filed by the appellants seeking condonation of delay of 37 days in filing the appeal on the grounds stated therein.
4. Mr. Mahanta, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the delay has taken place in view of the filing of W.P.(C) No. 16239 of 2025 as it was subsequent withdrawn on 23rd June, 2025 and hence, it should be condoned in the interest of justice.
5. An objection is received from Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 as he pleads for an adjournment to file an objection to the I.A. On merit, the condonation of delay at the instance of the appellants is seriously opposed.
6. Considering the facts pleaded on record and since the appellants had earlier approached this Court in W.P. (C) No. 16239 of 2025 and thereafter, the same was allowed to be withdrawn granting the liberty to present an appeal and hence, the delay has occasioned, the Court recording the objection of Mr. Chand, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 is inclined to condone the same in order to facilitate disposal of the appeal on merit.
7. Accordingly, it is ordered.
8. I.A. stands allowed with the delay of 37 days being condoned.
M.S.A. No. 29 of 2025
1. Heard.
2. Instant appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate Regulation Development Act, 2016 is filed by the appellants challenging the impugned order in OREAT Appeal No. 78 of 2022 dated 19th March, 2025 and for having confirmed the order of the RERA in C.C. No. 259 of 2019 on the grounds stated.
3. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the respective parties, list on 22nd August, 2025 for final hearing and orders.
Delay in filing an appeal may be condoned if justifiable reasons are presented, emphasizing procedural fairness and allowing the case to be heard on merits.
The court condoned a 9-day delay in filing an appeal under the Real Estate Regulation & Development Act, stressing the need for justice and procedural fairness despite the lapse.
The need for a liberal construction of 'sufficient cause' in Section 5 to advance substantial justice and the importance of public interest in cases involving the government.
The court emphasized the importance of substantive rights of the people and held that when technicalities of the procedural law are pitted against rights of private parties, the former should yield t....
Refusal to condone delay in appeal under Real Estate Act is upheld absent evidence of procedural irregularity.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
