Allowed

M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad Thru. Auth. Signatory Mr. Rajesh Kumar v. Amit Saxena

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2024RERAD/9/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

During admission of an appeal challenging an order by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, the Court held that the impugned order was invalid because the Bench lacked an administrative or technical member as mandated by the Act and Regulations. The appeal was allowed at the admission stage, quashing the order and remanding the matter.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 17.01.2024 set aside and matter remanded to the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal to pass fresh orders within four weeks.

M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36130

¶2

Court No. - 19

¶3

Case :- RERA APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 9 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad Thru. Auth. Signatory Mr. Rajesh Kumar Respondent :- Amit Saxena

¶5

Counsel for Appellant :- Abhishek Khare,Aahuti Agarwal

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Order on I.A. No. 1 of 2024

¶8

Heard Sri Abhishek Khare, the learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Amit Saxena, the respondent in person.

¶9

This is an application seeking condonation of delay of 32 days in filing the appeal.

¶10

Reasons for the delay have been explained in the affidavit filed in support of the application, which appear to be sufficient. The respondents in person does not oppose the application for condontion of delay.

¶11

Accordingly, the delay in filing appeal is condoned.

¶12

Order on Memo of Appeal

¶13

Although several grounds have been taken in the appeal and the learned counsel for the appellant has formulated four substantial questions of law, while advancing submissions on the admission of the appeal, he confined his submission to the ground that the impugned order has been passed by a Bench of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal consisting of its Chairman and a Judicial Member.

¶14

The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that Section 43(3) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 provides that 'every Bench of the

¶15

Appellate Tribunal shall consist of at least one judicial member and one administrative or technical member'. The Bench which has passed the impugned order dated 17.01.2024 did not consist of any Administrative or Technical member.

¶16

The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that Regulation 6(5) falling in Chapter 5 of the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 2019 also provides that an appeal shall be heard by a Bench comprising of one judicial member and one administrative or technical member, as provided under Section 43(3) of the Act.

¶17

The respondent in person could not dispute this factual and legal position. He however submitted that he is being deprived of the benefits of the award passed by RERA Authority on 26.03.2019 and a considerable delay has been caused in the matter.

¶18

Accordingly, this appeal is allowed at the admission stage. The impugned order dated 17.01.2024 passed by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal in I.A. No. 1009/2023 filed in Appeal No. 134/2019 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal for passing orders afresh keeping in view the mandate contained in Section 43(3) of the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act, 2016 and Regulation 6(5) falling in Chapter 5 of the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Regulations, 2019, within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order. .

¶19

The parties are directed to cooperate in expeditious disposal of the matter without seeking any unnecessary adjournment.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.5.2024 Pradeep/-

¶21

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad Thru. Auth. Signatory Mr. Rajesh Kumar v. Amit Saxena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Antriksh Realtech Pvt. Ltd. Ghaziabad Thru. Auth. Signatory Mr. Rajesh Kumar v. Amit Saxena

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Janta Gas Service Napiyar Plaza Thru Sameer Kumar Rai Prop. Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Labour Vidhan Bhawan and Others

Smt. Savita Devi and Ors. Vs Additional Commissioner Lucknow Deivision Lko.and 3 Ors.

Manoj Kumar Verma Vs D.M Sultanpur and Ors.

Bhikhi Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy.Deptt. of Civil Supply and Food and4 Ors.

Gurcharan Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.through Collector Kheri and 3 Others

Juber @ Suhail Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another