Mr. Justice G.S. Ahluwalia

Where completion certificate was erroneously obtained by promoters, then the same cannot be used for taking the promoters out of purview of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) – Sunil and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. – Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the scheme of RERA Act, 2016 is retroactive in character and if the projects are already completed or to which the completion certificate has been granted, the same would not come within the fold of Act, 2016 but the Act will apply on the ongoing projects and future projects registered under Section 3 to prospectively follow the mandate of Act, 2016. When an objection was filed by the Petitioners with regard to the applicability of provisions of Act, 2016, the RERA had obtained a spot inspection report and it was found that the Petitioners have not completed the development work and it was also observed by the Committee of three Officers that the completion certificate was not issued in accordance with law.

Where completion certificate was erroneously obtained by promoters, then the same cannot be used for taking the promoters out of purview of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) – Sunil and Ors. Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. – Madhya Pradesh High Court Read Post »

Merely because of initiation of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 the signatory of the cheque cannot escape from his liability | Section 96 of IBC does not bar on Court’s direction to deposit an amount as a condition precedent for suspension of sentence under NI Act, 1881 – Anurodh Mittal Vs. Rehat Trading Company and Anr. – Madhya Pradesh High Court

Hon’ble High Court refers P. Mohanraj & Ors. v. Shah Brothers Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (2021) ibclaw.in 24 SC and Ajay Kumar Radheyshyam Goenka v. Tourism Finance Corporation of India Ltd. (2023) ibclaw.in 30 SC judgments and holds that considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that merely because of initiation of proceedings under the Code, 2016 the signatory of the cheque cannot escape from his liability, it is held that conviction recorded by Trial Court was not bad on account of initiation of proceedings under the Code, 2016.

Merely because of initiation of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 the signatory of the cheque cannot escape from his liability | Section 96 of IBC does not bar on Court’s direction to deposit an amount as a condition precedent for suspension of sentence under NI Act, 1881 – Anurodh Mittal Vs. Rehat Trading Company and Anr. – Madhya Pradesh High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top