Allahabad High Court
M/S Devika Gold Homz Pvt. Ltd. ... vs Ratnakar Gedam on 28 July, 2023
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:50395
Court No. - 17
Case :- RERA APPEAL No. - 12 of 2023
Appellant :- M/S Devika Gold Homz Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Authorised Signatory
Respondent :- Ratnakar Gedam
Counsel for Appellant :- Azhar Ikram,Amit Jaiswal Ojus Law,Tanveer Ahmad Siddiqui
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
Under challenge is the judgment and order dated 05.5.2023, passed by the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No.206/21 [Dr. Ratnakar Gedam vs. Devika Gold Homz Pvt. Ltd] vide which the appeal has been allowed and the matter has been remitted to be decided by the Regulatory Authority afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the private respondent had approached the appellant for purchase of flat in their project known as Devika Gold Homz, situated at plot no. GH 06C,Sector-1, Greater Noida, Gautam Budh Nagar, U.P. by means of application dated 01.6.2013.
The flat bearing no.606, 6th floor, Tower DG-3 admeasuring 876 square feet, Super area was allotted to the respondent for consideration of Rs.2785680/- against which the respondent had deposited Rs.13,46,691/-.
For certain reasons the delivery of the said flat could not be given within the stipulated time consequent to which the respondent filed a complaint before the adjudicating officer on 10.9.2019 seeking compensation under different heads including delay interest. Appellants had also participated in the proceedings before the Adjudicating Officer and the complaint was allowed by means of order dated 19.11.2019. It is further stated that subsequent to the order of the Adjudicating Authority dated 19.11.2019 according to the appellants a settlement was arrived at between the parties on 17.10.2020 and in the meanwhile the recovery proceedings were initiated against the appellants.
It is submitted that the respondent had filed another complaint case before the regulatory authority and notices were issued to the appellant where he has submitted before the authority that the matter has already been settled by means of agreement dated 17.10.2020 and on the statement being made by the appellant the complaint was dismissed vide order dated 01.01.2021 which was rectified vide order dated 28.7.2021.
On the dismissal of the complaint case the respondent had preferred an appeal before the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal which has allowed the appeals by means of the impugned order dated 05.5.2023 and remitted the matter back to the Regulatory Authority to examine the complaint of the appellant afresh.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not dispute the said judgment but submits that he may be permitted to place all his arguments before the Regulatory Authority.
It is noticed that the parties were directed to appear before the Regulatory Authority on 04.7.2023 and the Regulatory Authority was directed to decide the matter within 30 days and we hope and trust and considering the fact that there is no interference by this Court in the present appeal, the Regulatory Authority would have proceeded in the matter.
Learned counsel for the appellant also states that he has appeared before the Regulatory Authority and has been permitted to raise all the objections and arguments which they desired to take against the complaint preferred by the respondent.
This Court does not find any cogent reason for interfering in the impugned order passed by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. It is expected that the Regulatory Authority would strictly comply with the directions issued by the Tribunal and conclude the proceedings with expedition. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.7.2023
mks
