Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 6401 Kant
Judgement Date : 4 March, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:9124
WP No. 592 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
WRIT PETITION NO.592 OF 2024 (GM-RES)
BETWEEN:
ANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LTD
A NON - BANKING FINANCE COMPANY
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
4TH FLOOR, SILVER MEROPOLIS,
JAI COACH COMPOUND,
OPPOSITE BIMBISAR NAGAR GOREGOAN (EAST)
MUMBAI, MAHARASHTRA,
INDIA - 400 063.
REPRESENTED BY AUTHORIZED OFFICER
SUSHAS.A.M
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. RISHABHA RAJ THAKUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. COMMUNE 1 BUYERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
COMMUNE 1 APARTMENTS
1ST FLOOR CLUB HOUSE,
Digitally signed MARASUR CHANDAPURA - ANEKAL ROAD
by NAGAVENI ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU - 562 106.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF NOW:
KARNATAKA COMMUNE ONE OWNERS
CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.
CLUB HOUSE 1ST FLOOR,
COMMUNE 1 APARTMENTS BUILDING,
CHANDAPURA- ANEKAL BUILDING,
SURVEY NO 477/4, 478/A2,
479/A AND 480/3.
MARASUR VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI,
ANEKAL TALUK, BENGALURU SOUTH - 562 106
2. COMMUNE PROPERTIES INDIA PVT LTD
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:9124
WP No. 592 of 2024
THE PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
NO 823, GROUND FLOOR, 21ST MAIN ROAD,
8TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA
BANGALORE - 560 095
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA QUASH / MODIFY THE
PRELIMINARY ORDER DATED 07/09/2023 PASSED BY THE
HONBLE REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY IN
COMPLAINT NO.CMP/210223/0007613 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Heard Sri.Rishabha Raj Thakur, learned counsel for
the petitioner.
2. The petitioner calls in question an interim order
granted by the RERA which according to the learned
counsel for the petitioner is erroneous. It is his case that
he is a registered owner of the 40 apartments in the
apartment complex and has a dispute with the second
respondent.
3. The RERA has heard the petitioners or directed
them to file written arguments and has reserved the
NC: 2024:KHC:9124
matter for its orders. Therefore, this is not the time at
which this Court would interfere and pass any order that
would stop RERA from pronouncing its judgment that too
at the instance of the petitioner who has a dispute with
the second respondent/private party.
4. It is not the case of the petitioner that the
proceedings before RERA are without jurisdiction or it has
not been heard. Therefore, the petition is rejected
reserving liberty to the petitioner to avail such remedy as
is available in law at the appropriate time before the
appropriate forum.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DR
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!