U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Its Executive Engineer Construction Division Lko. vs Sarita Devi — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Its Executive Engineer Construction Division Lko. vs Sarita Devi — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Appeal admitted; notice issued to the respondent returnable at an early date with steps for service within seven working days; further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 in Appeal No. 404 of 2024 to remain in abeyance till the next date of listing; appeal tagged with RERA Appeal No.166 of 2025 and listed on 27.01.2026.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the provisions of the Act of 2016 for instituting complaints under Section 31, and whether the principle of considering delay and laches before admitting a lis shall be followed by tribunals/statutory authority in absence of a prescribed limitation period. +4 more

Ratio / Principle

The appeal was admitted.

Key takeaways

On hearing counsel on admission, the Court found five substantial questions of law necessary to be framed for adjudication of the matter (set out as Issues 1-5).¶13
As an interim measure, till the next date of listing, further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 404 of 2024 shall remain in abeyance.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Prashant Kumar, J. — admission-stage order in RERA Appeal No. 232 of 2025 filed by U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act against Sarita Devi, assailing the judgment and order dated 29.08.2025 of the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No. 404 of 2024. Five substantial questions of law framed: (i) applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the delay-and-laches principle to Section 31 complaints in absence of a prescribed limitation period; (ii) whether a 'reasonable period' governs allottees' Section 31 complaints seeking Section 18(1) relief or the right remains open indefinitely; (iii) whether interest-for-delay claims under the proviso to Section 18(1) can be considered absent a timely 'demand' under the main proviso; (iv)-(v) whether the Tribunal exceeded the scope of the appeal by deciding merits. Appeal admitted; notice issued; further proceedings pursuant to the impugned order kept in abeyance till the next date; tagged with RERA Appeal No.166 of 2025 and listed for 27.01.2026.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

RERA APPEAL No. - 232 of 2025

U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Its Executive Engineer Construction Division Lko.

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

Sarita Devi

.....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ratnesh Chandra Counsel for Respondent(s) :

Court No. - 19

HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.

Heard Sri Manav Rathore holding brief of Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the appellant.

By means of present appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order dated 29.08.2025 passed by U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No. 404 of 2024 (Sarita Devi Versus U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad).

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant on the admission of the appeal. This Court finds the following substantial questions of law necessary to be framed for the adjudication of the matter:-

"(i) Whether the Limitation Act, 1963 would be applicable to the provisions of the Act of 2016 for instituting complaints under Section 31 of the Act of 2016 and whether the principle of considering 'delay arid latches' before admitting a lis, being a principle which advances the cause of justice, shall be followed or not by the tribunals/statutory authority in absence of a prescribed limitation period?

(ii) Whether in the absence of a statutorily prescribed period of limitation, a 'reasonable period' should be considered for instituting the complaint by the allottees under Section 31 for relief under provision of Section 18(1) of the Act of 2016 so as to justify latches and unexplained, unwarranted and unavoidable delay, or whether the right to file complaint under Section 31

RERA No. 232 of 2025

2

of the Act 2016 can be kept open for an endless/indefinite period?

(iii) Whether the claims of an allottee regarding the 'interest for every month of delay till handing over of the possession' made under the proviso to Section 18(1) of RERA Act, 2016 should be considered in absence of a "demand" contemplated under the main proviso of Section 18(1) which was not made within a reasonable period of time and whether such an entitlement to lodge a claim can be kept open for an indefinite/infinite time period?

(iv). Whether the Learned Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in going beyond the scope of the Appeal, which was only on the question of the applicability of the Limitation Act and delay and laches in filing the complaint under Section 31 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016?

(v). Whether the findings given by the Learned Appellate Tribunal on issues relating to the merits of the case of the complainant which were beyond the scope of the Appeal preferred before the learned Tribunal can be sustained?"

Admit.

Issue notice to the respondent returnable at an early date.

Steps for service of notice be taken within seven working days.

It is provided that till the next date of listing, further proceedings in pursuance of the impugned order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the learned Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No. 404 of 2024, shall remain in abeyance.

Let this appeal be tagged along with RERA Appeal No.166 of 2025 and list on 27.01.2026.

(Prashant Kumar,J.)

December 18, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench