Recovery of Interest/Penalty/Compensation

High Court directs to execute Revenue Recovery Certificate (RRC) issued by RERA within a time bound frame – Harendra Singh Bhadoria Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. – Madhya Pradesh High Court

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

High Court directs to execute Revenue Recovery Certificate (RRC) issued by RERA within a time bound frame – Harendra Singh Bhadoria Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. – Madhya Pradesh High Court Read Post »

Treatment of pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 in case Promoter’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on settlement between Allottees and Promotors | Recovery of balance pre-deposit in case of appeal dismissed – Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (Greater NOIDA) Vs. Sachin Verma – Uttar Pradesh REAT

In this important judgment, Hon’ble Bench of Uttar Pradesh REAT held that:

(i) It is the duty of the Tribunal to arrange to transfer the pre-deposited money to the concerned allottee/consumer in case the promoter’s appeal is dismissed.
(ii) However, since the promoter might not have paid the full payable amount or there being a prospect of some amount having already been recovered from the promoter under execution proceedings at the level of the Authority or AO, it is just and lawful that the Tribunal transfers the amount to the Authority for transferring the same to the allottee/consumer after due diligence at its end and to recover any additional amount which could be due to be paid by the promoter; or return to the promoter any amount that could be in excess of the entitlement of the allottee/consumer.

Treatment of pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 in case Promoter’s appeal is dismissed as withdrawn on settlement between Allottees and Promotors | Recovery of balance pre-deposit in case of appeal dismissed – Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (Greater NOIDA) Vs. Sachin Verma – Uttar Pradesh REAT Read Post »

Whether Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has jurisdiction to issue an order of recovery warrant under Section 40 of RERA, 2016 – Marg Properties Ltd. Vs. Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulating Authority (TNRERA) and Ors. – Madras High Court

Hon’ble Madras High Court held that:

(i) Once the regulatory authority passed an order under Section 40(1) of RERA, 2016, the order impugned would reveal that the recovery warrant was issued under Section 40(1) of the RERA and it was sent to the District Collector to recover the money. Therefore, the adjudicating authority has not exceeded its limits beyond the scope of the powers conferred under Section 40(1) of the RERA.
(ii) The regulatory authority treated the recovery of amount and issued a warrant under Section 40(1) of the RERA to the District Collector for the purpose of recovering the same by invoking the provisions of the Revenue Recovery Act and that being the scope of the order, this Court do not find any infirmity.

Whether Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has jurisdiction to issue an order of recovery warrant under Section 40 of RERA, 2016 – Marg Properties Ltd. Vs. Tamil Nadu Real Estate Regulating Authority (TNRERA) and Ors. – Madras 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 »

Landmark judgment in RERA, 2016 – Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of UP & Ors. etc. – Supreme Court

This judgment covers: A. Object and Reasons of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. A.1 Statement of object and reasons. A.2 Interpretation of Section 18 of the RERA Act. A.3 Unconditional absolute and Unqualified Right of the Allottee to seek Refund: Section 18(1) and Section 19(4) of the RERA Act. A.4 Section 71 of the RERA Act. B. Whether Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 is retrospective or retroactive in its operation and what will be its legal consequence if tested on the anvil of the Constitution of India?. C. Whether the Regulatory Authority(RERA) has jurisdiction to direct return/refund of the amount to the allottee under Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 of the RERA Act or the jurisdiction exclusively lies with the adjudicating officer under Section 71 of the RERA Act?. C.1 Refund of Amount. C.2 The interest of the promoter is equally safeguarded. C.3 Scope and functions of the Adjudicating Officer. C.4 If Regulatory Authority (RERA) and Adjudicating Officer either come to different conclusions on the same questions or in a single complaint?. C.5 If single complaint is filed seeking a combination of reliefs. C.6 Regulatory Authority disposes of the application expeditiously and not to restrain the mandate of 60 days as referred to under Section 71(3) of the Act. C.7 Conclusion. D. Whether Section 81 of the RERA Act authorizes the Regulatory Authority to delegate its powers to a single member of the authority to hear complaints instituted under Section 31 of the RERA Act?. E. Whether the condition of pre-deposit under proviso to Section 43(5) of the RERA Act for entertaining substantive right of appeal is sustainable in law?. E.1 Determination of Refund amount. E.2 Right of appeal which is a creature of the statute. E.3 Pre-deposit under Section 43(5) of RERA Act is not violate Articles 14 or 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. F. Whether the authority has the power to issue recovery certificates for recovery of the principal amount under Section 40(1) of the Act?. G. Disposed of

Landmark judgment in RERA, 2016 – Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of UP & Ors. etc. – Supreme Court Read Post »

Power to waive of pre-deposit requirement under Section 43(5) of RERA | Constitutional validity of the proviso to Section 43(5) | Adjudication of Interest, Compensation, Penalty etc. under RERA | Powers and Jurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority and Adjudicating Officer – Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and others – Punjab & Haryana High Court

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

Power to waive of pre-deposit requirement under Section 43(5) of RERA | Constitutional validity of the proviso to Section 43(5) | Adjudication of Interest, Compensation, Penalty etc. under RERA | Powers and Jurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority and Adjudicating Officer – Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Haryana and others – Punjab & Haryana High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top