Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
PANKAJ BHATIA
Ratan Buildtech Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Anil Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard Sri Sudeep Kumar along with Mahima Pahwa and Sri Prashant Kumar Singh, learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the appellants and Sri Azhar Ikram along with Sri Manish Singh, learned Counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents-allottee. Sri Azhar Ikram also appears on behalf of the appellant-allottee in RERA Appeal No.70 of 2025.
2. The RERA Appeal Defective No.18; RERA Appeal Defective No.19 of 2025; RERA Appeal Defective No.20 of 2025 and RERA Appeal Defective No.25 of 2025 have been filed along with an application for condonation of delay. The cause shown are sufficient. The applications for condonation of delay are allowed. The delay in filing the appeals are condoned.
3. All the abovesaid appeals arise out of the same judgment passed by the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, as such, are being decided by means of this common judgment.
4. For the brevity, the facts as emerge from the RERA Appeal No.72 of 2025 are that the respondent was allotted an apartment by the appellant at NOIDA under a builder buyer agreement on 22.01.2019. It is stated that on 16.09.2022, completion certificate was issued by the Greater Noida Industrial Development
The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act mandates granting interest for delays in possession, encompassing circumstances including force majeure, without necessitating rigorous inquiry from t....
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 a pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is mandatory for promoters appealing against orders, with no discretion to waive this re....
(1) Parliament has power to legislate even retrospectively to take into its fold pre-existing contract and rights executed between parties in larger public interest.(2) Real Estate (Regulation and De....
The court upheld the requirement for total deposit of compensation and interest before hearing appeals under the Real Estate Act, affirming RERA's jurisdiction over disputes involving landowners as a....
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....
In compensation claims under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, a promoter must deposit only 30% to entertain an appeal, contrary to 100% for return of amounts, as clarified by the Sup....
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....
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
