Sheth Infraworld Pvt. Ltd Mumbai- ... vs Mahesh Mahadeo Kelkar And Anr
2021 Latest Caselaw 928 Bom

                                                                     14-sast-9333-19


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                    SECOND APPEAL (ST) NO. 9333 OF 2019

 Sheth Infraworld Pvt. Ltd.                     ...Appellant
       Vs.
 Mahesh Mahadeo Kelkar & Anr.                   ...Respondents


                                      ----

 Mr. Nilesh Gala, Kedar Khambete a/w. Ms. Pragathi Malle, for the
 Appellant.
 Mr. Satish Dedhia, for the respondents.

                                      ----

                                    CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J.

                                    DATE     : 14th JANUARY 2021


 P.C.

 .        Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. This second appeal challenges the concurrent orders passed by

the RERA and the Appellate Tribunal.

3. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is

admitted on the following substantial questions of law.

(i) Whether the composition of the Real Estate Regulatory

Authority (RERA) in this case was proper and in accordance with

Mamta Kale page 1 of 2

14-sast-9333-19

Section 21 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act,

2006 ?

(ii) Whether Section 71 r/w. Section 72 of the Act confers

exclusive powers on the Adjudicating Officer, as a result of which

the complaint under Section 18 of the said Act for interest, could not

have been heard and decided by the RERA ?

(iii) Whether the impugned judgment passed by the

Chairman of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) as incharge

Appellate Tribunal under the said Act would be sustainable in view

of Section 43(3) of the said Act ?

(iv) Whether the grant of interest under Section 18 of the

said Act, on delayed possession is mandatory in nature or the

Adjudicating Officer has power to exclude the delay, caused due to

mitigating circumstances, depending upon facts and circumstances

of each case ?

4. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 waives

service. Hearing is expedited.

C.V. BHADANG, J.

      Mamta Kale                                                     page 2 of 2