Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MR. SOUMEN SEN, CJ, MR. SYAM KUMAR V.M., J
M/S. ORCHID HABITAT PRIVATE LTD. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing of the petitioner's counsel. (Para 1) |
| 2. k-rera's jurisdiction is contingent upon the registration requirements. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. directive to k-rera to issue a reasoned decision. (Para 4) |
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 2nd respondent to take a decision on the issue of jurisdiction of the K-RERA to proceed with the complaints.
3. The view of the 3rd 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 2nd respondent shall decide the issue independent of the observations made by the 3rd respondent which may be prejudicial to the interests of
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
