Dilip Sahu vs Chhattisgarh Real Estate ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5557 Chatt

                                       1

                                                                      NAFR
               HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                        Writ Appeal No. 428 of 2022

Dilip Sahu S/o Shri Akrur Sahu Aged About 41 Years R/o Lakhagarh,
Tehsil - Pithora, District - Mahasamund (C.G.)

                                                               ---- Appellant

                                   Versus

1.   Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Through Its
      Registrar, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

2.   Satpal Singh Gambhiri S/o Shri Sujaan Singh Gambhir Aged About
      49 Years R/o Lakhagarh, Tehsil - Pithora, District - Mahasamund
      (C.G.)

                                                           ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

06.09.2022

Heard Mr. Surfaraj Khan, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. This appeal is preferred against an order dated 20.06.2022 passed

by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (C) No. 2615 of 2022.

3. The order reads as follows:

"Mr. Surfaraj Khan, counsel for the petitioner.

Heard.

Issue notice to the respondent No. 2 on payment of P.F.

as per rules.

Heard on I.A. No. 01/2022 application for grant of Ad-

interim writ.

Upon due consideration I.A. 01/2022 is allowed.

It is directed that on petitioner's depositing 50% of the

total amount within a period of 30 days from today, the

effect and operation of the impugned order shall remain

stayed till the further order."

4. Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) had allowed

an application filed by the respondent No. 2 under Section 31 of the Real

Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 by which an amount of Rs.

39,53,250/-, which includes advanced amount of Rs. 30,00,000/- and

interest of Rs. 9,53,250/-, was directed to be paid to respondent No. 2

within a period of two months.

5. The discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge cannot be

said to be arbitrary or unreasonable. Therefore, we are not inclined to

entertain this appeal and accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.

6. No cost.

                         Sd/-                                    Sd/-
                  (Arup Kumar Goswami)                    (Deepak Kumar Tiwari)
                      Chief Justice                             Judge



Brijmohan