Scribd
Upload
8 views4 pages

Supreme Court Ruling on RERA Appeal

The Supreme Court of India has allowed an intervention application in the Civil Appeal No. 4408/2023, where the appellants, Vipul Jaswantlal Sanghavi & Ors., are aggrieved by a High Court judgment regarding their complaints dismissed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MRERA). The Court directed the appellants to approach the Appellate Authority under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016, to raise their contentions regarding the applicability of the RERA Act. The appeal has been disposed of, allowing the appellants to pursue their claims further.

Uploaded by

office.dbhandari
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views4 pages

Supreme Court Ruling on RERA Appeal

The Supreme Court of India has allowed an intervention application in the Civil Appeal No. 4408/2023, where the appellants, Vipul Jaswantlal Sanghavi & Ors., are aggrieved by a High Court judgment regarding their complaints dismissed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MRERA). The Court directed the appellants to approach the Appellate Authority under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016, to raise their contentions regarding the applicability of the RERA Act. The appeal has been disposed of, allowing the appellants to pursue their claims further.

Uploaded by

office.dbhandari
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA


CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Civil Appeal No.4408/2023

VIPUL JASWANTLAL SANGHAVI & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED


(EARLIER KNOWN AS LODHA DEVELOPERS LTD.) & ORS. Respondent(s)

O R D E R

1. Taking into consideration the averments made in the

Interlocutory Application No.145739 of 2023 seeking intervention,

the said application is allowed.

2. Cause title be amended accordingly.

3. The appellants have approached this Court claiming to be

aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and order of the High Court of

Judicature at Bombay. The appellants were not parties to the

proceedings before, which culminated in the impugned Judgment.

However, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MRERA)

by its order dated 12­03­2021 and other connected orders, dismissed

the complaints of the appellants. The premise on which the

complaints were rejected was that the RERA Act did not apply; in

reaching that conclusion the RERA was felt bound by the impugned

Judgment of the High Court.


Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by
VISHAL ANAND

4.
Date: 2023.10.06
19:38:31 IST
Reason:
This Court has considered the submissions of the parties and

is of the opinion that the appellants should approach the Appellate

Authority (under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016).


2

In such event, it is open to the appellants to raise all

contentions including the applicability of all or any provisions of

the RERA Act, which according to them, have been interpreted

erroneously by the impugned Judgment. In such event, the RERA

Appellate Authority shall consider merits of their submissions,

unconstrained by the question of limitation. The rights and

contentions of the respondents to contend otherwise are kept open.

This order will apply in the case of those appellants whose

complaints too are pending before the RERA Authority.

5. The Appeal is disposed in the above­terms.

……………………………………………J
([Link] BHAT)

…………………………………J
(ARAVIND KUMAR)
NEW DELHI
5TH OCTOBER, 2023.
3

ITEM NO.103 COURT NO.8 SECTION III

S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal No.4408/2023

VIPUL JASWANTLAL SANGHAVI & ORS. Appellant(s)

VERSUS

MACROTECH DEVELOPERS LIMITED (EARLIER KNOWN AS Respondent(s)


LODHA DEVELOPERS LTD.) & ORS.

(IA No. 126495/2023 ­ APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION, IA No. 67255/2021


­ EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA
No. 145739/2023 ­ INTERVENTION APPLICATION & IA No. 67254/2021 ­
PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 05­10­2023 This appeal was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR

For Appellant(s)
Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Udayaditya Banerjee, AOR
Mr. Kaustubh Patil, Adv.
Ms. Parul Shukla, Adv.
Ms. Shreya Bhojnagarwala, Adv.
Mr. Chandratanay Choubey, Adv.
For Respondent(s)
Mr. Vinayak Bhandari, Adv.
Mr. Arnav Narain, AOR
Ms. Teesta Mishra, Adv.

Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR


Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv.
Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv.

Mr. Pallav Shishodia, Sr. Adv.


Ms. Shraddha Deshmukh , AOR
4

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following


O R D E R

1. Exemption Applications are allowed.

2. Application for intervention is also allowed.

3. The appeal is disposed of, in terms of the signed order.

4. Pending applications are also disposed of.

(VISHAL ANAND) (BEENA JOLLY)


ASTT. REGISTRAR­cum­PS COURT MASTER(NSH)
(Signed Order is placed on the file)

Common questions

Powered by AI

Amending the cause title in legal proceedings is significant as it ensures that all parties are correctly identified and that legal accountability and responsibilities are accurately attributed. It reflects the procedural accuracy and completeness of the judicial process. In this specific case, the amendment signaled recognition of newly raised issues through the intervention application, ensuring that procedural fairness was maintained and all relevant grievances were considered .

Interlocutory Application No.145739 of 2023 was instrumental in the Supreme Court’s decision to allow intervention in the case. This application highlighted issues necessitating consideration by the Court, influencing the Court to amend the cause title accordingly and consider the broader implications of the appellants' grievances under the RERA Act .

The Supreme Court recommended that the appellants should approach the Appellate Authority under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016. They were advised to raise all contentions, including the applicability and interpretation of the RERA Act provisions which they believed were erroneously interpreted by the High Court. The Appellate Authority was instructed to consider these submissions on their merits, unconstrained by the question of limitation .

The primary legal issue in this case was the applicability of the RERA Act, which the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority initially decided did not apply. The appellants' complaints were dismissed based on the impugned judgment of the High Court, which alluded to the inapplicability of the RERA Act. The Supreme Court suggested that the appellants approach the Appellate Authority under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority Act, 2016, to raise their contentions regarding the interpretation of the RERA Act .

The Supreme Court disposed of the appeal and directed that pending applications, including those for intervention and exemptions, be allowed and the applications were disposed of along with the main appeal .

You might also like