Allowed

Smrity Singhal v. M/S C.J. Infrastructure Private Limited

Delhi HC15 Sept 2025RERA APPEAL/2/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of two connected RERA appeals by setting aside impugned orders of RERA and REAT which had dismissed complaints claiming the building was completed pre-RERA. The Court relied on prior judgments establishing the building was not complete and remanded the matter to RERA for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of RERA and REAT are set aside. RERA requested to reconsider the matter afresh. Hearing fixed before RERA on 14.10.2025.

Smrity Singhal Vs M/S C.J. Infrastructure Private Limited — Consumer Protection | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~72 & 73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- RERA APPEAL 2/2025

¶4

SMRITY SINGHAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. T.S. Khehar & Ms. Sanya Bhatia, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

M/S C.J. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

¶7

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Mandeep Singh Vinaik, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Thanglunkim, Mr. S.K Sagar & Mr. Gaikhuanlung, Advocates.

¶8

¶9

RERA APPEAL 3/2025 NAVNEET SINGHAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr. T.S. Khehar & Ms. Sanya Bhatia, Advocates along with Appellant in person.

¶10

versus

¶11

M/S C.J. INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED

¶12

.....Respondent Through: Mr. Mandeep Singh Vinaik, Senior Advocate along with Ms. Thanglunkim, Mr. S.K Sagar & Mr. Gaikhuanlung, Advocates.

¶13

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

¶14

O R D E R % 15.09.2025

¶15

The present Appeals, being RERA Appeal No. 2/2025 and

¶16

This is a digitally signed order.

¶17

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2025 at 12:24:40

¶18

RERA Appeal No. 3/2025, have been filed under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016¹ , challenging the common impugned judgment dated 11.09.2024, passed by the Ld. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal² in Appeal No. 142/REAT/2023 and Appeal No. 144/REAT/2023, respectively.

¶19

With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, these two connected Appeals shall stand disposed of by this common order.

¶20

In the present case, both the Ld. Real Estate Regulatory Authority³ and the Ld. REAT have concurrently dismissed the complaint filed by the Appellant(s) on the grounds that the building in question was completed prior to the enforcement of the RERA Act, which came into force on 01.05.2017. However, the Appellants dispute this conclusion, citing certain documents accompanying the appeals during the hearing before us.

¶21

We note that this Bench, in two connected Appeals bearing RERA Appeal Nos. 5 & 6 of 2024, has concluded that the building of the Respondent was not complete, and consequently, the provisions of the Act of 2016 shall apply. Paragraph Nos. 17 and 18 of the said judgment are reproduced as under:-

¶22

“17. Therefore, we stand fortified in our conclusion that in the facts of the present case, the OCC cannot be deemed to be granted. To claim that the OCC was deemed granted, the Appellants should have done due diligence on their part. However, the conduct of the Appellants lacks in this regard.

¶23

18. Further, it is submitted by the DDA that the OCC Application was examined as per UBBL–2016. The Appellants/Architect did not rectify the shortfalls in the OCC application, and on 08.09.2021, the application was rejected by DDA. The copy of the

¶24

1 Act

¶25

2 REAT

¶26

3 RERA

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2025 at 12:24:40

¶29

rejection letter dated 08.09.2021, along with the screenshot of the portal is annexed as Annexure-l in the pleadings. It is to be noted that in light of the rejection of the OCC, whether the OCC was deemed granted or not holds no value, as the situation at the time of the filing of the Appeal before the REAT is that no OCC exists with the Appellants, therefore RERA Act will be applicable.”

¶30

In view of the aforesaid position, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the impugned orders passed by the Ld. RERA, which were subsequently confirmed by the Ld. REAT, are hereby set aside. The Ld. RERA is requested to reconsider the matter afresh, taking into account all relevant aspects of the case.

¶31

It is needless to observe that the Authority shall proceed to decide the matter without being influenced by the impugned orders passed in these two Appeals.

¶32

The parties, through their respective counsel, are directed to appear before the Ld. RERA on 14.10.2025.

¶33

A copy of this Order be kept in connected matter.

¶34

ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.

¶35

HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J. SEPTEMBER 15, 2025/tk/ds

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/09/2025 at 12:24:40

Smrity Singhal v. M/S C.J. Infrastructure Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smrity Singhal v. M/S C.J. Infrastructure Private Limited

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

Similar cases

Surajmal Memorial Education Society & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sushma Ghai & Anr. Vs Omkara Asset Reconstruction Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Sewa International Fashions Ltd. Vs Kalawati Mathrani (Dead) Thr Legal Representatives

Deutsche Bank Ag Vs Ganga Jeans Pvt. Ltd. through Its Director Mr Narendra Barmecha & Ors.

Dinesh Kumar Sachdeva Vs Sh Rohit Sachdeva & Anr.

Sardul Singh Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.