This is an order of admission regarding an appeal under Section 58 of the RERA Act, 2016 challenging a Tribunal order. The Court framed five substantial questions of law regarding limitation, delay, the scope of the appeal, and indefinite filing rights before admitting the appeal and fixing a future date.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW
RERA APPEAL No. - 234 of 2025
U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Executive Engineer Lko
.....Appellant(s)
Versus
Ram Prakash Singh
.....Respondent(s)
| Counsel for Appellant(s) : Ratnesh Chandra |
|---|
| Counsel for Respondent(s) : |
Court No. - 19
HON'BLE PRASHANT KUMAR, J.
"(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. 234 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?"
(Prashant Kumar,J.)
December 18, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-
Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to complaints under Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 in the absence of a prescribed limitation period?
Whether the right to file a complaint under Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 can be kept open for an indefinite period?
Whether the Learned Appellate Tribunal was justified in going beyond the scope of the appeal to decide issues on merits?
4 provisions across 2 enactments
U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru. Executive Engineer Lko
Ram Prakash Singh
Prashant Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
