Back
AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR (Order reserved on 29.03.2022) (Order delivered on 06.05.2022)
MA No. 25 of 2021 M/s. Gold Bricks Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Authorized Directors Shri Rakesh Saraogi, Regd. Office Anandam World City, GAD Colony, Kachna, Main Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492007 ---- Appellant Versus Atit Agrawal, S/o. Satya Narayan Agrawal, E/18, Anandam World City, Kachna, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent MA No. 19 of 2021 M/s. Gold Bricks Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Authorized Directors Shri Rakesh Saraogi, Regd. Office Anandam World City, GAD Colony, Kachna, Main Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492007 ---- Appellant Versus Satyanarayan Agrawal, S/o. Late Ramgopal Agrawal, E/31 & E/32, Anandam World City, Kachna, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent MA No. 20 of 2021 M/s. Gold Bricks Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Authorized Directors Shri Rakesh Saraogi, Regd. Office Anandam World City, GAD Colony, Kachna, Main Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492007 ---- Appellant Versus Smt. Sharda Devi Agrawal, W/o. Satya Narayan Agrawal, E/33 Anandam World City, Kachna, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent MA No. 22 of 2021 M/s. Gold Bricks Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Authorized Directors Shri Rakesh Saraogi, Regd. Office Anandam World City, GAD Colony, Kachna, Main Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492007 ---- Appellant Versus Atul Agrawal, S/o. Satya Narayan Agrawal, E/20 Anandam World City, Kachna, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MA No. 31 of 2021 Ram Kumari Kaushik, W/o. Shree Santosh Kaushik, Aged About 41 Years, R/o. Ward No.7, Chakarbhata Campus, Nagar Panchayat Bodri, Tahsil Bilha, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Appellant Versus
1. Smt. Kiran Bhajgawalli, W/o. Shree Rajesh Bhajgawali, R/o. Gehun Badi, Shikhar Colony, Darri Para, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh.
2. Dhara Infra Build Private Limited, Through Its Directors Smt. Lavjeet Sharma And Smt. Kalpana Soni, Address - Dhara Infrabuild Private Limited, CLC Plaza Mangla Chowk, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents For Appellant in M.A.Nos.25, : Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate
22, 19 & 20 of 2021 For Appellant in M.A.No.31/2021 : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent No.1 in M.A. : Mr. Anup Majumdar, Advocate Nos.25, 19 & 20 of 2021 For Respondent No.1 in M.A. : Mr. Shailesh Tiwari & Mr. Shrijan No.31 of 2021 Shukla, Advocates For Respondent No.2 in M.A. : Mr. R.S. Marhas, Advocate No.31/2021.
Mr. Amrito Das, Advocate appears as Amicus Curiae.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri, J.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal, J.
['Shalvik Tiwari', '', 'Ashwin Panickar', 'ALOK BAKSHI', '', 'SHAILESH TIWARI', 'POORVA TIWARI', 'SHRIJAN SHUKLA', 'RANBIR SINGH MARHAS', 'ANUBHUTI MARHASRahul KumarVENKETESH PANDEY']
CAV Judgment
Per Goutam Bhaduri, J.
1. All these miscellaneous appeals are heard together, as have been admitted primarily on the common questions of law.
2. The appellants herein are the Builders/ Colonizers/ Developers. The private respondents who purchased the plots filed a complaint before the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (for short “RERA”). According to the private respondents, they purchased plots in a project known as Anandam World City, Kachna on different dates. It was alleged that while they wanted to construct the houses, it was objected by the builders and a demand was made for infrastructure developments fees. Apart from that, the development work in the Colony i.e. Walkway, Fire-station, Open Area, Temple, Development of Pond, Garden, Other amenities of the Retail & Business Shops, Hospital, Amphitheater, Supermarket, Multiplex, ATM, Library, Doctor, Kids' Play Area was not provided. The boundary wall also remained incomplete and the roads were without street lights. Whereas in the brochure and the advertisement, all the amenities were promised to be provided. On such different count, the petition was filed wherein a joint order was passed by the RERA on 10.02.2020 and all the applications filed by the private respondents/ beneficiaries were dismissed.
3. Being aggrieved by such order, an appeal was preferred before the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 08.12.2020 remanded the case with certain directions and RERA was directed to get the area inspected by an Architect to evaluate whether development work was carried out or not and further direction was given that issue about payment of development/user charges in absence of agreement non-execution of the agreement be referred to the adjudicating authority and the grievances of the private home-
buyer were directed to be decided afresh.
4. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Appellate Tribunal, these appeals have been filed.
5. (i) M.A. No.25/2021 was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :
(a) “Whether the order dated 08-12-2020 passed by the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was without jurisdiction since it was passed by a single member?
(b) “Whether the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in remanding the case to the adjudicating officer constituted under Section 71 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act,2016 (for short “RERA”) to adjudicate on various complaints other than issue of compensation in view of limited jurisdiction conferred on the adjudicating officer under Section 71 of the RERA Act, 2016”
(ii) M.A.No.22/2021 was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :
(a) “Whether the order dated 08-12-2020 passed by the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was without jurisdiction since it was passed by a single member?
(b) “Whether the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in remanding the case to the adjudicating officer constituted under Section 71 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (for short “RERA”) to adjudicate on various complaints other than issue of compensation in view of limited jurisdiction conferred on the adjudicating officer under Section 71 of the RERA Act, 2016”
(iii) M.A.No.31/2021 was admitted on the following substantial question of law :
“Whether the order dated 04/03/2021 passed by the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was without jurisdiction since it was passed by a single member bench?”
(iv) M.A.No.19/2021 was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :
(a) “Whether the order dated 08-12-2020 passed by the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was without jurisdiction since it was passed by a single member?
(b) “Whether the learned Real Estate Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in remanding the case to the adjudicating officer constituted under Section 71 of Real Estate(Regulatory and Development) Act,2016 (for short “RERA”) to adjudicate on various complaints other than issue
