CASE NO. & TITLE CIVIL APPEAL NO. 6292 OF 2021 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 29856/2019): Valsan P. .…Appellant(s) Versus The State of Kerala and Ors. …. Respondent(s) The petitioner worked in the telecom department of the central government (CG) for 10 years (1974-84) but later joined 1st state government service for three years (1984-87) … Read more
Test for determining whether an establishment is Industrial or not within section 25L of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 The hon’ble supreme court has reiterated that test for determining whether an establishment is Industrial or not within section 25L of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 is what are the predominant functions and activities of the said Department. … Read more
Where are the Courts established and what are their territorial Jurisdictions? In Uttar Pradesh, as per GO dated 31.10.2017 and GO dated 02.11.2017 Commercial Courts have been notified/ established in 13 districts with territorial jurisdictions as hereinunder: S.N. Districts Territorial Jurisdiction over districts 1 Agra Agra, Mathura, Mainpuri, Firozabad 2 Aligarh Aligarh, Hathras Etah, Kasganj … Read more
This article examines the legal limitations in enforcing RERA recovery certificates through auction of promoters’ properties. It argues that amounts recoverable under RERA are not “arrears of land revenue” in substance, and therefore cannot override secured interests such as mortgages and debenture rights. Drawing on key High Court precedents, the piece highlights how indiscriminate auctions by revenue authorities can frustrate homebuyers and create further litigation, and suggests a more structured approach by RERA to identify encumbrance-free assets before issuing recovery certificates.
Download the Societies Registration Act, 1860 Download Societies Registration (Amendment) Act, 2022
On 16.07.2021 In SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.2492 OF 2021 K.P. NATARAJAN & ANR. VERSUS MUTHALAMMAL & ORS. while dismissing the SLP the Hon’ble Court held that: 1.High Court can Exercise its wider powers under Article 227 while sitting in civil revision to prevent miscarriage of justice. Powers of the High Court under Article 227 are in addition to and wider than the powers under Section 115 of the Code. ● 2.Non-appointment of guardian of minor by civil court and then deciding matter ex-parte is against Order XXXII … Read more
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal reaffirmed that under Section 18 of the RERA Act, the right to seek refund in case of delay vests exclusively with the allottee and remains unqualified. Even in the absence of a formal Builder Buyer Agreement, a promoter cannot evade liability where delay in completion is established. The decision underscores that once the allottee opts to withdraw, the promoter is bound to refund the entire amount with statutory interest, reinforcing the consumer-centric framework of the Act.
Courts may intervene in contractual arrangements where there exists a clear inequality of bargaining power between parties. This case from the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal examines whether one-sided builder agreements can bind allottees, especially in delayed possession and cost escalation disputes. It highlights how statutory protections under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 override unfair contractual terms and reinforce consumer rights in real estate transactions.
In the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal† (Before D.K. Arora, Chairman and Tej Bahadur Singh, Member (Judicial) and Rajiv Misra, Member (Administrative)) Appeal No. (D) 480/2020 Lucknow Development Authority … Appellant; Versus Anupama Singh … Respondent. And Appeal No. (D) 481/2020 Lucknow Development Authority … Appellant; Versus Murli Manohar Verma … Respondent. Appeal No. (D) 480/2020 and Appeal No. (D) 481/2020 Decided on June 11, 2021, [Disposal … Read more
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal clarified that interest on refund under the RERA framework must align with the statutory rate prescribed in the Act and Rules, i.e., MCLR + 1%, and not arbitrary contractual rates such as 24%. Emphasising the consumer-protective scheme of the Act, the Tribunal held that interest under Section 18 is compensatory in nature and must balance equities between promoter and allottee, ensuring fairness while rejecting one-sided contractual stipulations.
A promoter’s appeal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 cannot be entertained unless the statutory pre-deposit under Section 43(5) is first complied with. This decision of the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal reiterates that deposit of the entire amount payable to the allottee—including interest and compensation—is a mandatory condition precedent, leaving no discretion with the Tribunal. The ruling reinforces the consumer-protective framework of RERA by preventing promoters from delaying enforcement through appeals without first securing the allottee’s dues.
This article examines the scope of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and clarifies that RERA applies even to projects with a completion certificate where statutory obligations of promoters continue. It analyses the jurisdiction of the Regulatory Authority over unregistered and exempted projects, particularly in cases involving unsold inventory and post-completion liabilities such as conveyance, possession, and defect rectification. The discussion is anchored in the decision of *Lucknow Development Authority v. Uma Shankar Dubey*, highlighting that exemption from registration does not exclude projects from the substantive framework of the Act.