Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
In the dynamic world of real estate development in India, compliance with the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) is crucial for developers and buyers alike. A landmark judgment from the Supreme Court in Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority v Larsen and Toubro Limited, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1750, decided on 13-08-2025 has shed light on the interpretation of Section 5(2) of RERA. This case addresses whether projects with completion certificates are deemed registered, limiting the regulatory authority's power to issue notices arbitrarily. For developers facing regulatory scrutiny and homebuyers seeking clarity, this ruling offers significant guidance—though always consult a legal professional for specific advice.
The dispute centered on Larsen and Toubro Limited's (L&T) projects, Green Reserve Towers 1-4, where the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) issued notices demanding registration. L&T argued that these projects, having obtained completion certificates and being substantially developed, were already deemed registered under Section 5(2) of RERA. The Supreme Court examined the validity of these notices and UPRERA's authority, emphasizing statutory compliance and procedural fairness. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
As per the Court's order dated 17.05.2024, projects with completion certificates and substantial progress are to be considered registered under Section 5(2). This interpretation prevents regulatory overreach on compliant projects. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
The Supreme Court's decision highlights several pivotal points:- Deemed Registration under Section 5(2): Projects that have received completion certificates or are substantially developed are automatically deemed registered, even without formal application. This shields completed projects from retrospective registration demands. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462- Validity of UPRERA Notices: Notices must be based on proper examination of records and conform to statutory provisions. Arbitrary actions risk being quashed. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462- Procedural Safeguards: Authorities must provide opportunities for hearings and allow inspection of records before enforcement. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
These findings align with RERA's objective to balance promoter interests with buyer protection while ensuring regulatory actions are lawful.
Section 5(2) of RERA stipulates conditions under which ongoing projects are deemed registered. In this case, L&T challenged UPRERA's notices, asserting their projects met these criteria due to completion certificates. The Court upheld that projects already substantially developed or with completion certificates may be deemed registered, even if formal registration was not explicitly done initially. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
This ruling is particularly relevant for legacy projects predating RERA, where substantial completion exempts them from fresh registration.
UPRERA's power to issue notices and enforce compliance is not absolute. The Court stressed that actions must be grounded in the law, respecting procedural safeguards. Notices without a proper basis or ignoring project status can be invalidated. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
In related RERA matters, such as appeals under Section 18 for delay compensation, tribunals have similarly emphasized jurisdictional limits. For instance, in a case involving interest for delayed possession, the Appellate Tribunal affirmed jurisdiction only upon statutory compliance, directing pre-deposits and verification. Ratan Buildtech Private Limited vs Anil Kumar - 2025 Supreme(All) 3241
The judgment underscores due process: any action taken by UPRERA must be accompanied by due process, including giving the project proponents an opportunity to be heard and examine the records. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462 This mirrors broader RERA jurisprudence, where procedural irregularities can derail enforcement, as seen in Tamil Nadu RERA cases upholding interim orders only on evidence. J.K.PROPERTIES vs Sri Sai Nagar Owners Welfare Association (SSNOWA) - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 75271
RERA's framework extends beyond registration to enforcement mechanisms like interest for delays under Section 18. In recent rulings:- Tribunals have awarded interest from specific dates (e.g., 01.01.2020 to 13.10.2022) at MCLR +1%, confirming adjudicating authorities' powers without exhaustive inquiries. Ratan Buildtech Private Limited vs Anil Kumar - 2025 Supreme(All) 3123Ratan Buildtech Private Limited vs Anil Kumar - 2025 Supreme(All) 3241- Jurisdiction follows predicate facts, ensuring actions align with project locations, much like UPRERA's role in Uttar Pradesh developments. PIGEON EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED VS - 2025 Supreme(Online)(NCLT) 4702
These cases reinforce that RERA authorities, including UPRERA, must adhere to rules like the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016, particularly Rule 33 for calculations. Developers should maintain meticulous records of completion certificates to invoke deemed registration.
Not all projects qualify for deemed registration:- Those without completion certificates or substantial development may still require formal registration.- The ruling is fact-specific; projects must demonstrably meet Section 5(2) conditions.- Procedural lapses by authorities can lead to quashing, but developers must promptly challenge improper notices. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
Both parties should prioritize clear records and statutory adherence to minimize disputes. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462
The Supreme Court's ruling in UPRERA v L&T clarifies that completion certificates trigger deemed registration under RERA Section 5(2), curbing arbitrary notices. It promotes procedural fairness and aligns with RERA's protective ethos. While this provides general insights, real estate matters are nuanced—seek tailored legal counsel.
In summary, compliant projects gain protection, but ongoing vigilance ensures smooth compliance. This decision may influence similar disputes nationwide, strengthening RERA's implementation.
References:1. Larsen & Toubro Limited VS State of U. P. - 2024 0 Supreme(All) 1462 - Core judgment and orders on deemed registration and notices.2. Ratan Buildtech Private Limited vs Anil Kumar - 2025 Supreme(All) 3123Ratan Buildtech Private Limited vs Anil Kumar - 2025 Supreme(All) 3241 - Related Section 18 cases on jurisdiction and interest.
Disclaimer: This post offers general information based on public judgments and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for your situation.
#RERA #RealEstateLaw #SupremeCourt
REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 4664 11.4. The High Court of Rajasthan in the case of TREHAN APNA GHAR BUILDWELL PRIVATE LIMITED V. ... They approach the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (‘RERA’ for short) seeking certain relief. The RERA passes an order granting certain benefits to the respondents on 30-06-2023 and 03-08-2023 respectiv....
Chapter-V prescribed for setting up a regulatory authority and Chapter-VII prescribed for establishment of a Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. 14. ... Bharat Prakash Joukani and in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited Vs. Ms. Rekha Sinha. The Division Bench also approved and considered the scope of Section 55 of the Act and recorded as under:- “69. ... As rightly held in Larsen and Toubro Limited (supra), an orde....
Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority to Larsen & Toubro Limited; (iii) issue writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority to provide the respective registration numbers for the project of Larsen & Toubro Limited ... #HL_S....
, Ghaziabad-201 010, Uttar Pradesh …. ... Transferor Company No. 2- to deal in Real Estate Development & Construction, Land Acquisition, Sale & Development, Property Leasing, Renting & Agency Services. iii. ... Reference for the same has been provided in Clauses 1.14, 2.13, 3.13, 4.13, 5.13, and 6.13 at pages 20, 26, 31, 36, 41, and 47 of the Application, respectively. 13. ... Applicant Company No. 6/ Transferee ....
Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA), has been confirmed. ... State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2021) 18 SCC 1. ... Real Estate Regulatory Authority (TNRERA), by allowing this CMSA and to grant such other reliefs. ... 08.04.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes bala/ps To 1.The Tamil Nadu Real Es....
Larsen and Toubro Limited reported in (2008) 17 VST 1, the Hon’ble Supreme Court while affirming the judgment of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited vs. ... We have gone through the judgments of the Hon’ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Larsen and Toubro Limited (supra) and the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Larsen and....
Section 18 of RERA Act read with Rule 33 of The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “RERA Rules”) are relevant. The said Section and Rule are quoted in subsequent paragraph. ... On the basis of the abovesaid powers, the Tribunal,on the basis of limited arguments raised as are reflected from order, decided the appeal vide order dated 14.05.2025 and set aside the order passed by the Adjudicating Author....
Section 18 of RERA Act read with Rule 33 of The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as “RERA Rules”) are relevant. The said Section and Rule are quoted in subsequent paragraph. 15.
Estate Regulatory Authority, Chennai, dated 20.08.2025, granting interim order, directing the petitioner not to alienate the remaining plots in respect of the subject project. ... Nadu Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Chennai. ... Real Estate Appellate Tribunal reported in 2022 SCC On Line Del 1568. 6. ... 17.12.2025 Internet: Yes Index : Yes / No Neutral Cita....
CIT, 1965 SCC OnLine SC 80 : (1965) 56 ITR 365: A IR 1965 SC 1636 : (1965) 2 SCR 908], on the principle of stare decisis clearly bind us. The judgment of this Court in Larsen & Toubro [CCE & Customs v. ... Larsen & Toubro Ltd., (2016) 1 SCC 170] is accepted, in that case, it will affect so many other assesses in whose favour the decisions have already been taken relying upon and/or following the decision of this Court in Larsen & Toubro#HL_....
2. Baldlev Singh vs. State of Haryana, (2015) 17 SCC 554 16. PSI Datta Pendke, was the person who had set the law into motion. However, he reported to be dead and, therefore, his evidence is not recorded. 3. Rakesh Kumar Raghuvanshi vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 122 4. Criminal Appeal No. 250/2025 (Bharat Aambale vs. The State of Chhattisgarh) decided by the Hon’ble Apex Court on 6.1.2025
The said challenge as such was repelled on the ground that part of the offence had been committed by the accused persons as per the complaint as the amounts have been transferred through vouchers to Delhi and overseas and the ECIR had been recorded at the Head Quarters Investigation Unit. Resultantly, while keeping in view the law laid down in Vijay Mandanlal Choudhary (supra) and while also noticing the judgment in Rana Ayyub vs. Directorate of Enforcement (supra), the challenge as such to the jurisdiction was repelled, which would help the case of the respondents. 2025, the Apex Court was ....
Statement of Moon Juneseok-Respondent No. 1 “One day in May, 2022 Nikhil Kumar Singh came to Bellary Road near Hiranandani Villa, where I live, and gave me a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- in cash. Then one day in June, 2022 when I went to the Gold Pinch hotel, Nikhil Kumar came in a car outside the hotel and gave me a sum of Rs.80,00,000/- in cash. When I was texting Nitesh Merugu on the Kakao app on my mobile phone, I sent the message by mistake to the HR & Admin Group, which includes our company’s HR & Admin and Finance Officers. The message was seen by the HR Manager and others in that group ....
that they came in three cars and that their presence has also been supported by two eye-witnesses, including the appellant, the SIT for obvious reasons, as the case has a political nature, shielded the private respondents. ’7. The private respondents also cited Jamin v State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 506. The private respondents, collectively, sought dismissal of these appeals. APPELLANT’S REJOINDER: 8. By way of rejoinder, learned counsel for the appellant submits that though there has been consistency in the stand of the appellant with regard to presence of....
S. No. Head of Compensation Compensation awarded 1. Income Rs.15,000 2. 40% addition towards future prospects Rs.15,000 + Rs.6,000 = Rs.21,000 3. 1/5th deduction towards personal and living expenses Rs.21,000 - Rs.4,200 = Rs.16,800 4. Multiplier 16 5. Compensation for loss of dependency Rs.16,800 x 12 x 16 = Rs.32,25,600 6. Conventional Heads i) Funeral expenses ii) Loss of estate Rs.33,000 7. Loss of Consortium Rs.3,....
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
