CPC

Section 35 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 clearly enumerates the provisions of CPC that are applicable to the proceedings before RERA | As per the principles of expressio unius, all other provisions of CPC are excluded from applying to the proceedings before the RERA – Sumit Khanna and Anr. Vs. Kanchan Sunil Adani and Ors. – Himachal Pradesh High Court

Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court referring sub-section (2) of Section 35 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 held that according to the principles of expressio unius, it can conveniently be held that vide the expressio unius principle, the RERA clearly enumerates the provisions of CPC that are applicable to the proceedings before it and on the same principle, the Legislature is, therefore, deemed to have intentionally excluded all other provisions of CPC from applying to the proceedings before the RERA.

Section 35 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 clearly enumerates the provisions of CPC that are applicable to the proceedings before RERA | As per the principles of expressio unius, all other provisions of CPC are excluded from applying to the proceedings before the RERA – Sumit Khanna and Anr. Vs. Kanchan Sunil Adani and Ors. – Himachal Pradesh High Court Read Post »

Whether RERA Appellate Tribunal has the power to award interest for the first time, when such relief is rejected by the Adjudicating Authority, in the light of Section 71(3) and Section 72 of the RERA Act? | Whether RERA Appellate Tribunal erred in not remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Officer for consideration and adjudication of compensation as per the provisions of Section 18 read with Section 71(3) and Section 72 of the RERA Act? – Forefront Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Rujuta Mandar Thatte and Anr. – Bombay High Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

Whether RERA Appellate Tribunal has the power to award interest for the first time, when such relief is rejected by the Adjudicating Authority, in the light of Section 71(3) and Section 72 of the RERA Act? | Whether RERA Appellate Tribunal erred in not remanding the matter to the Adjudicating Officer for consideration and adjudication of compensation as per the provisions of Section 18 read with Section 71(3) and Section 72 of the RERA Act? – Forefront Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mrs. Rujuta Mandar Thatte and Anr. – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Appeal under Section 58 of RERA, 2016 be registered as “Civil Misc. Appeal” to be heard by the Judge sitting alone | The Court fees of Rs. 5000/- be paid on appeal filed under Section 58 of RERA Act, 2016 before the High Court – Trehan Apna Ghar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Munish Ranjan Sahay – Rajasthan High Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

Appeal under Section 58 of RERA, 2016 be registered as “Civil Misc. Appeal” to be heard by the Judge sitting alone | The Court fees of Rs. 5000/- be paid on appeal filed under Section 58 of RERA Act, 2016 before the High Court – Trehan Apna Ghar Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Munish Ranjan Sahay – Rajasthan High Court Read Post »

The order passed by Appellate Tribunal (REAT) under RERA cannot be termed as a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC even though Section 57 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 makes the order passed by REAT executable as a ‘decree’ – Khilla Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Subhash Jain – Madhya Pradesh High Court

Login with GoogleOR Username Password Remember Me     Forgot Password In case you’ve already logged in, click here to

The order passed by Appellate Tribunal (REAT) under RERA cannot be termed as a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC even though Section 57 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 makes the order passed by REAT executable as a ‘decree’ – Khilla Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Subhash Jain – Madhya Pradesh High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top