Quashed

Avalon Projects v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC16 Feb 2023CW/9744/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the Adjudicating Officer's order dated 29.07.2021 regarding a real estate complaint based on the Apex Court's view on jurisdiction. The application was transferred to the RERA Authority to decide the refund and compensation matter afresh by a specified date.

What did the court decide?

The order of the Adjudicating Officer dated 29.07.2021 was quashed, and Application No.2018-2421 was transferred to the RERA Authority for a fresh decision within two weeks.

Avalon Projects Vs State of Rajasthan — Insurance | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023/RJJP/003016]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9744/2021

¶4

Avalon Projects, (A Unit Of Grj Distributors And Developers Pvt. Ltd.), Having Its Registered Office At 64, Scindia House, Connaught Place, New Delhi - 11001 And Corporate Office At 9Th Floor, Sas Tower, Near Medicity, Sector 38, Gurgaon Through Its Authorized Signatory Shri Jasvir Singh.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Urban Development And Housing Department, Food Building, Secretariat, Jaipur - 302005.

¶8

Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Through Chairman, 2Nd And 3Rd Floor, Rsic Building, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

¶9

Adjudicating Officer, Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Through Chairman, 2Nd And 3Rd Floor, Rsic Building, Udyog Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

¶10

Kishan Chand Bhareja, H.no. 561/27, Gali No. 8, Madan Puri, Gurgaon.

¶11

Ajay Kumar Gupta, R/o D - 2, Pushpanjili Enclave, Pitampura, New Delhi - 110034.

¶12

Ajay Singal, R/o Plot No. 16, Road No. 51, Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi.

¶13

Adish Estate Pvt. Ltd., Having Its Office At A-46, Ff Double Storey, West Patel Nagar, Central Delhi, Delhi Through Director.

¶14

Anil Chillar, R/o A-38, Ff West Patel Nagar, New Delhi.

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashtha Singhal for Mr. Archit Bohra For Respondent(s) : Mr. Saransh Ghiya

¶17

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Judgment / Order

16/02/2023

[2023/RJJP/003016]

[CW-9744/2021]

(2 of 5)

The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the order dated 29.07.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Officer, Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Jaipur (for short ‘the RERA Authority’) in Application No.2018-2421, whereby the Adjudicating Officer decided the complaint on merits and passed orders for refund of amount with interest and compensation.

¶24

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Civil Appeal No.67456749 of 2001) decided on 11.11.2021 framed question No.2: “Whether the authority has jurisdiction to direct return/ refund of the amount to the allottee under Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 of the Act or the jurisdiction exclusively lies with the adjudicating officer under Section 71 of the Act?”

¶25

Answering the aforesaid question, the Hon’ble Apex Court in para 86 of the aforesaid judgment has observed as under:-

¶26

“86. From the scheme of the Act of which a detailed reference has been made and taking note of power of adjudication delineated with the regulatory authority and adjudicating officer, what finally culls out is that although the Act indicates the distinct expressions like ‘refund’, ‘interest’, ‘penalty’ and ‘compensation’, a conjoint reading of Sections 18 and 19 clearly manifests that when it comes to refund of the amount, and interest on the refund

[2023/RJJP/003016]

[CW-9744/2021]

(3 of 5)

amount, or directing payment of interest for delayed delivery of possession, or penalty and interest thereon, it is the regulatory authority which has the power to examine and determine the outcome of a complaint. At the same time, when it comes to a question of seeking the relief of adjudging compensation and interest thereon under Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19, the adjudicating officer exclusively has the power to determine, keeping in view the collective reading of Section 71 read with Section 72 of the Act. If the adjudication under Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 other than compensation as envisaged, if extended to the adjudicating officer as prayed that, in our view, may intend to expand the ambit and scope of the powers and functions of the adjudicating officer under Section 71 and that would be against the mandate of the Act 2016.”

¶31

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the settled legal position by the Hon’ble Apex Court, this Court also in various cases has set-aside the order of the Adjudicating Officer, allowing the applications for refund, interest on the amount and compensation. In support of his submissions, the counsel has placed reliance upon the orders dated 4.8.2022 passed in SBCW P.No. 9679/2021 (Chetan Prakash Goyal Vs. Adjudicating Officer, Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority & Ors.), 11.5.2022 passed in SBCW P.No. 6663/2022 (Genesis Infratech Private Limited Vs.

[2023/RJJP/003016]

[CW-9744/2021]

(4 of 5)

Adjudicating Officer, Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority & Anr.). Counsel submits that in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of ewtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and the orders passed by this Court in the cases cited above, the impugned order of the Adjudicating Officer in this case also deserves to be quashed and set aside with the direction to transfer the application to the RERA Authority for a fresh decision.

¶36

Counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute the legal position as stated above and also gives consent for transferring the application to the RERA Authority for fresh decision after quashing the order of the Adjudicating Officer.

¶37

Considering the averments made by the counsel appearing for the respective parties and the case law cited, this writ petition which has been filed by the petitioner assailing the legality and validity of the order dated 29.07.2021, passed by the Adjudicating Officer, RERA, Jaipur, is disposed of in the following terms on the request and with the consent of learned counsels for the respective parties:1. The order dated 29.07.2021 passed by the Adjudicating Officer allowing the Application No.2018-2421 is quashed and set aside.

[2023/RJJP/003016]

[CW-9744/2021]

(5 of 5)

The Application No.2018-2421 stands transferred to the RERA Authority with necessary modifications to be carried out by the respondent No.4 within a period of two weeks from today whereupon, the RERA Authority shall proceed to decide the same in accordance with law.

¶42

The parties shall remain present before the RERA Authority on 3.3.2023.

¶43

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

¶44

SharmaNK/8

Avalon Projects v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Avalon Projects v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr Bajrang Lal Sharma S/O Sh. Naanag Ram Sharma Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jale Singh Son of Sh. Rupchand Vs Union of India

Dr. Parmeshwar Gangawat S/O Sh. Vishweshwar Prasad Gangawat Vs the State of Rajasthan

Jitendra Singh S/O Shri Gopal Singh Vs the State of Rajasthan

Nand Singh Rathore Andors Vs State of Raj and Anr.

State of Rajasthan Vs Chhitar Mal Jat S/O Bajrang Lal