Back
ARUN PALLI, VIKRAM AGGARWAL
Vrinda Krishna Realtech Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vikram Aggarwal, J.
The petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding respondent No.4 to entertain the appeal to be filed by the petitioner under Section 43 of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016 (for short "the RERA Act"), without insisting upon pre-deposit of 30% of the penalty amount.
2. The petitioner is a promoter and was developing a residential colony in Village Mamoon, Tehsil and District Pathankot pursuant to a licence having been granted to it on 28.10.2013 (Annexure P-5). A criminal complaint was filed by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Punjab (for short the "RERA") against the director of the petitioner company. As per the averments in the writ petition, a recovery notice dated 16.05.2023 (Annexure P-9) was received by the petitioner company for recovery of Rs. 50 lakhs purported to have been imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 15.07.2019 (Annexure P-10).
3. The case set up by the petitioner company is that the said order dated 15.07.2019 was an ex parte order and even the proceedings were ex parte and the petitioner was not served at any point of time.
4. A response dated 30.05.2023 (Annexure P-15) was submitted to
The court upheld the validity of the pre-deposit requirement under Section 43(5) of the RERA Act, emphasizing that the petitioner failed to demonstrate exceptional hardship warranting a waiver.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to reduce the pre-deposit condition for hearing an appeal under Section 43(5) of the RERA Act based on genuine hardships, as ....
Lack of payment of higher amount of pre-deposit - Statutory conditions requiring pre deposit to be made with respect to disputed demand of penalty (where a minimum 30% was required to be deposited an....
The requirement of pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is mandatory and cannot be waived unless there are exceptional circumstances of complete f....
The court upheld that the High Court can only waive mandatory pre-deposit under extreme hardship; the Real Estate Authority retains jurisdiction for directing refunds and interest, separate from adju....
Pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate Act must be refunded post-appeal resolution, safeguarding allottee interests.
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
