Determination of K-RERA's jurisdiction over registration requirements under the Real Estate Act.

Heard Mr. P. Sanjay, learned counsel for the petitioners.

2. In view of the fact that the appellants have already submitted a written objection, as evident from Ext. P8 of the writ petition, contending that no registration under Section 3 (1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is required in respect of the project in question, we dispose of this writ appeal by directing the 2^nd respondent to take a decision on the issue of jurisdiction of the K-RERA to proceed with the complaints.

3. The view of the 3^rd respondent, as clarified by the learned Single Judge, can only be treated as an order of reference to K-RERA to determine whether registration is required for the project of the appellants or not. It shall not be construed as a conclusive determination regarding the requirement or otherwise of registration. The 2^nd respondent shall decide the issue independent of the observations made by the 3^rd respondent which may be prejudicial to the interests of the writ appellants.

4. We further direct the 2^nd respondent to dispose of the matter within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order by either of the parties, by passing a reasoned order after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellants and all stakeholders. The decision shall be communicated within one week from the date of such order.