The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 protects home buyers from delays in possession, allowing for compensation through interest, as determined by the Adjudicating Officer under the Act.

JUDGMENT :

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J.

1. At the outset, this Court deem it apt to divide the judgment into sections to facilitate analysis, which are as follows:

(A) Introduction

2. Heard Shri Anurag Singh, Shri Umesh Chandra Pandey and Shri Shikhar Srivastava, learned Counsel representing the appellant and Shri Pradeep Kumar Singh and Shri Santosh Kumar Bhatt, learned Counsel representing the respondent.

3. The above-captioned appeals have been filed by the appellant-U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “RERA Act 2016”) wherein by virtue of the impugned order, the learned U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) has dismissed appeals filed by the appellant and it has been directed that the amount deposited in terms of Section 43 (5) of the RERA Act, 2016 by the appellant to be transferred to the concerned account of the Regulatory Authority for disposal as per the provisions of the Act.

4. Due to reasons recorded by this Court in its earlier order dated 28.1.2023, the delay in filing of these appeals has already been condoned and as such these bunch of appeals were heard together for their disposal on merits.

(B) RERA Appeal Nos. 67, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 87 of 2023

5. These appeals arise out of the common judgment/order dated 25.11.2022 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal.

6. Since common question of law has been raised by the appellant in all these appeals, it would be in the interest of justice that all these appeals are consolidated and taken together for hearing and disposal. However, before this Court deals with the question of law raised in these appeals, the brief facts culminating into these appeals be narrated to appreciate the law in its proper perspective. In this regard, the facts of the lead matter being RERA Appeal No. 67 of 2023 (Complainant-Dhruv Kr. Chaturvedi) is taken into consideration.

Factual Matrix

7. It has been submitted that the appellant is a public institution constituted under the provisions of U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Adhiniyam, 1973’) and is an instrumentality of State which works on ‘no profit and no loss’ basis. The appellant had been constituted for the welfare of the public and is engaged in providing planned development of the city and answering to the residential needs of the public at large in a regularised manner.

8. It is claimed that the appellant has acquired the land for development of housing projects under the provisions of U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Adhiniyam and the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as provided under law. It is the case of the appellant that a Scheme was launched in Vrindavan Yojna and after delivery of possession made by the Land Acquisition in the year 2011 and during the project was to be in progress, a new Act, namely “The