Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
75 judgments · newest first · showing 1–75
M/S Sunstar Homes challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging that it improperly prescribes a single mode of execution for both types of orders under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. …
Sunstar Homes challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, arguing that it improperly prescribes a single method of execution for both types of orders under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The …
Sunstar Homes, a partnership, filed writ petitions challenging the constitutionality of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging that it improperly prescribes a single mode of execution for both sub‑sections of Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and …
M/S Sunstar Homes challenged the validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging it improperly mandates a single mode of execution for both sub‑section 1 and sub‑section 2 of Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The RERA …
The applicants sought a review of the High Court's order that had allowed the respondent's writ petition and quashed a caveat and final notices issued by the Mamlatdar demanding possession of flats and payment of amounts. The applicants alleged that the court's decision was based on a …
Sunstar Homes challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, arguing that it improperly prescribes a single method of execution for both types of orders under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The …
M/S Sunstar Homes challenged the validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging it improperly mandates a single mode of execution for both sub‑section 1 and sub‑section 2 of Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The RERA …
Sunstar Homes, a partnership, filed writ petitions challenging the constitutionality of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging that it improperly prescribes a single mode of execution for both sub‑sections of Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and …
M/S Sunstar Homes challenged the constitutional validity of Rule 4 of the Goa Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, alleging that it improperly prescribes a single mode of execution for both types of orders under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. …
The petitioners filed a writ petition seeking relief, but their counsel acknowledged that a specific remedy exists under Section 44 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The petitioners expressed a desire to withdraw the writ petition and pursue the statutory remedy instead. The …
The petitioners challenged an interim order dated 8 May 2026 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, alleging that the order could be questioned via a writ petition. The court noted that the petitioners have a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil …
The appellant, Aurangbad Holiday Resorts Pune, appealed an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directing it to pay simple interest of 10.75% on Rs.79,21,148 from February 2016 until possession of a flat, along with costs. The appellant claimed the delay was due to a stop‑work …
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority ordered Aurangbad Holiday Resorts (the appellant) to pay simple interest of 10.75% on Rs.79,21,148 to the allottees for delay in handing over flat No. 1004, and awarded costs. The appellant appealed, contending that the delay was caused by a stop‑work …
The High Court considered an appeal by Mahindra Bloomdale Developers Ltd. against an order that had been posted for hearing without an affidavit‑in‑reply from the appellant. The appellant had attempted to file a miscellaneous application challenging the tenability of the appeal, which the Appellate …
Agile Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to deposit a differential amount of interest under the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The High Court of Bombay listed the appeals …
Agile Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to deposit a differential amount of interest under the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The High Court of Bombay listed the appeals …
Agile Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to deposit a differential amount of interest under the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The High Court of Bombay listed the appeals …
Agile Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to deposit a differential amount of interest under the proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The High Court of Bombay listed the appeals …
Petitioner Vishal Singh filed a writ petition alleging that despite orders of the RERA authority, the respondent had not transferred possession of a flat or released funds, claiming he had deposited money but was denied possession. The petitioner later testified that he had actually taken possession …
The promoters Sanklecha Constructions and its directors were ordered by MahaRERA to refund the allottees' paid consideration with interest, allowing them the option to do so after obtaining an occupation certificate (OC). The Appellate Tribunal later deleted this option, directing an immediate …
The appellant, Harilal Talkshi Shah, sought an injunction to restrain respondents (including M/s. Gada Enterprise and others) from constructing on and creating third‑party rights over a 3267‑sq‑yard property in Borivali, alleging that his leasehold rights under a 1971 Assignment Deed were still …
Inderjeet Singh Pabla, an allottee under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the Collector and Tahsildar to execute a Recovery Warrant dated 27 June 2023, issued under Section 40(1) of RERA following a final MahaRERA order of 31 …
Decent Buildwell Private Limited filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging a recovery order dated 03.07.2026 issued by the Recovery Officer (Revenue) of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UP RERA) and a recovery certificate dated 02.02.2026 issued by the …
The Bombay High Court examined cross‑appeals by JP Builders (the promoter) and Santosh Sandhu (the allottee) arising from a disputed flat purchase in a RERA‑registered project. The allottee failed to provide satisfactory proof of payment of stamp duty and registration charges, leading the promoter …
The Bombay High Court examined cross‑appeals by JP Builders (the promoter) and Santosh Sandhu (the allottee) arising from a disputed flat purchase in a RERA‑registered project. The allottee failed to provide satisfactory proof of payment of stamp duty and registration charges, leading the promoter …
The Bombay High Court examined cross‑appeals by JP Builders (the promoter) and Santosh Sandhu (the allottee) arising from a disputed flat purchase in a RERA‑registered project. The allottee failed to provide satisfactory proof of payment of stamp duty and registration charges, leading the promoter …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court seeking a mandamus to enforce two recovery warrants issued under Section 40(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, for a sum of Rs.52,84,570 and monthly compensation, by attaching the assets of Respondent No.6. …
The applicants, Laxman Mura Vaid and Rasila Laxman Vaid, filed a Section 11(6) application seeking appointment of an arbitrator under the arbitration clause (Clause 86) of their 2022 Agreement for Sale of a flat in the Ruparel Skygreens project. They alleged the promoter, Shree Siddhivinayak …
The appellant Sanklecha Constructions Pvt. Ltd. filed an interim application seeking condonation of a 63‑day delay in filing a second appeal under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The court examined whether the period during which a review petition was pending (23 Nov 2023 to …
The petitioner, Shri Tarachand Premji Dedhia, filed a writ petition seeking, among other reliefs, a mandamus directing the attachment of his residential and commercial property pursuant to a RERA order dated 19‑10‑2022. He also claimed interest for delayed possession under the Real Estate …
The appellants, purchasers of flats in a RERA‑regulated project, obtained a partial order from the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directing the promoters to pay interest for delayed possession, contingent on the issuance of an occupancy certificate. The promoters failed to obtain the …
The appellants, purchasers of flats in a RERA‑regulated project, obtained a partial order from the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directing the promoters to pay interest for delayed possession, contingent on the issuance of an occupancy certificate. The promoters failed to obtain the …
The appellants, Nariman Sapal Patel & Anr., filed a second appeal challenging an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 1 August 2025, which held that their earlier appeal was filed within the statutory limitation period. They argued that under Section 44(2) of the Real Estate …
The appellants, Nariman Sapal Patel & Anr., filed a second appeal challenging an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 1 August 2025, which held that their earlier appeal was filed within the statutory limitation period. They argued that under Section 44(2) of the Real Estate …
The appellants, Mahesh Shrikrishna More and another, appealed a decision of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal which refused to order the promoter to hand over possession of a flat despite the appellants’ offer to deposit the pending balance in the Tribunal. The Tribunal held that under …
Mukesh Chamdia, an allottee, appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal that rejected his application for possession of an apartment, on the ground that he had not paid the balance consideration or shown willingness to pay interest. The Tribunal held that Chamdia was …
Mukesh Chamdia, an allottee, appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal that rejected his application for the promoter to deliver possession of his apartment. The Tribunal held that Chamdia had neither paid the balance consideration nor shown willingness to pay …
The F.N. Social Education Medical Charities Trust challenged the Pune Municipal Corporation’s (PMC) permission granted to Goel Ganga India Pvt. Ltd. to develop a property it claimed was gifted to the Trust, alleging the developer obtained the land through a forged will. The Supreme Court (referred …
The allottees purchased a flat from Deep Homes and Construction LLP under a sale agreement that required possession by 31 March 2019. The promoter delivered fit‑out possession on 25 March 2021 without an occupation certificate, which was only obtained on 14 June 2021. The allottees complained to …
The appellant, Seema Promoters and Builders Pvt Ltd, appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to refund the full consideration paid by the allottees for two shops, together with interest. The allottees had entered into sale agreements in June 2017, …
Sushma Verma filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking relief against a RERA order dated 24‑07‑2025 that incorrectly stated her principal amount had been refunded. The RERA Court had earlier ordered the private respondent, Grih Vatika Homes, to refund Rs 9,26,697 with interest, but the …
The Bombay High Court initiated suo motu proceedings pursuant to the Supreme Court's direction in Yash Developers v. Harihar Krupa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. to conduct a performance audit of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971. The Court heard the …
The petitioners, owners of 27 decimals of land in Plot No. 438, challenged an interim stay order dated 27‑08‑2025 issued by the Special Presiding Officer of the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) that halted construction and title transfer of their land, now part of the "Surya Signature" …
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed Shri Sai Vishram Co‑operative Housing Society and its promoters to pay interest under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). The Society appealed to the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, which …
The Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed Shri Sai Vishram Co‑operative Housing Society and its promoters to pay interest under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and to make a pre‑deposit under the proviso to Section 43(5). The Society …
M/s Amit Enterprises Housing Ltd appealed against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal directing it to deposit the full amount ordered by the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority. The appellant argued that any interest payable under Section 18 of the Real Estate …
The petitioner, Saurabh Vohra, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the Collector/District Magistrate of Gautam Budh Nagar (respondent 3) to enforce a recovery certificate dated 6 January 2026 issued under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation …
Petitioner Shashi Jain filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Collector/District Magistrate of Gautam Budh Nagar to enforce a recovery certificate dated 06.10.2023 issued under Section 40 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, pursuant to an …
The petitioner, Sudarshan Sinha, filed a writ petition challenging two orders dated 15 May 2025 and 2 September 2025 issued by the Chairman of the Bihar Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) that allegedly misrepresented the refund of Rs.12 lakh, stating that the full amount had been returned when …
Ramabhai Motibhai Bharwad filed a writ petition under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution seeking regularisation of an unauthorised construction in a Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (GIDC) estate, invoking the Gujarat Regularisation of Unauthorized Development Act, 2022. The …
The petitioners, M/s. Raj Construction, sought to withdraw their writ application after the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) of Bihar issued a final order on 10 June 2025 directing the parties to resolve the dispute before a civil court. The petitioner argued that compliance with the RERA …
Gen X Infra Homes Pvt Ltd filed a writ petition challenging an arrest warrant issued by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) of Bihar. Both the petitioner and Respondent No. 4 (Krishna Singh) jointly submitted that they had reached an amicable settlement on 10 January 2026, documented in a …
The petitioners, Sanjeev Raj and Rajendra Prasad Sinha, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging interim orders dated 03‑06‑2025 passed by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA). They sought relief from the High Court despite having a specific statutory remedy to approach the …
The appellant society, representing homebuyers, challenged the NCLAT's order admitting Takshashila Heights India Private Ltd (the corporate debtor) into the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) on a petition filed by Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd (the financial creditor). The …
The Supreme Court examined whether the appellants, who entered into buy‑back memoranda of understanding for residential units, were "speculative investors" and thus barred from filing Section 7 insolvency petitions, and whether the 2019 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance and the …
The Supreme Court considered appeals by CREDAI, Godrej Properties and Sai Sahara Developers challenging a National Green Tribunal (NGT) order that applied the General Conditions (GC) of the EIA 2006 Notification to building and construction projects (Item 8(a)) and township projects (Item 8(b)) …
The respondents booked an apartment with Godrej Projects and paid a 20% earnest money deposit as per the Apartment Buyer Agreement. After the developer offered possession in June 2017, the respondents cancelled the purchase citing a market recession and demanded a full refund of Rs.51,12,310 with …
The appellant, Dharmendra Sharma, purchased an apartment from the Agra Development Authority (ADA) and sought possession after paying the agreed price, but ADA's offer of possession on 4 December 2014 was made without a completion certificate or firefighting clearance certificate. The appellant …
The appellants, home buyers in a real‑estate project, obtained a decree from the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) ordering a refund of their investments with interest. While insolvency proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) were pending, the …
The Supreme Court examined whether the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (NOIDA), as the lessor in a 90‑year lease of land for a residential project, could be treated as a financial creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The Court held that the lease does not qualify as a …
The developer Experion Developers failed to deliver possession of an apartment to the consumer, Sushma Ashok Shiroor, within the 42‑month period stipulated in the Apartment Buyer’s Agreement. The consumer filed a complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which ordered the …
The developer, IREO Private Limited, was sued by apartment buyers for failing to hand over possession of their flats within the contractual period and for not providing promised amenities. The buyers sought specific performance and, alternatively, a refund of the amount paid with interest. The NCDRC …
The Supreme Court considered appeals filed by Newtech Promoters and Developers challenging orders of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority that directed refund of home‑buyers' money with interest. The promoters argued that the authority, a single member, lacked jurisdiction, that the …
M/s Orator Marketing Pvt. Ltd., the assignee of a Rs 1.60 crore interest‑free term loan given to M/s Samtex Desinz Pvt. Ltd. for working‑capital, filed a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) to initiate a corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP). The …
The builder Laureate promised delivery of a flat by October 2015. The original allottee, after paying several instalments, sold the flat to Charanjeet Singh in 2016, who stepped into her rights. Construction stalled due to environmental orders, and the builder failed to deliver possession. Singh …
The Supreme Court considered appeals concerning the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP) of Jaypee Infratech Limited (JIL) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The resolution plan submitted by NBCC (India) Ltd. was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) with a 97.36% …
The petitioner, a single home buyer, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking cancellation of agreements, refund of monies, or completion of the Sushant Megapolis real estate project, along with directions for a monitoring committee, forensic audit, and investigations by …
The Supreme Court examined whether Spade Financial Services Ltd. and AAA Landmark Pvt. Ltd. could be treated as financial creditors of AKME Projects Ltd. during its corporate insolvency resolution process. It held that the transactions between the corporate debtor and the two entities were …
The petitioners challenged Sections 3, 4, and 10 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2020, which introduced threshold requirements for allottees and certain financial creditors to initiate corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), clarified that a corporate debtor can …
The appellant, Imperia Structures Ltd., launched a housing scheme in 2011 and entered builder‑buyer agreements with the respondents in 2013. After the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) came into force, the respondents filed consumer complaints alleging delay and deficiency, …
The Supreme Court considered a batch of writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018, which classifies home‑buyers/allottees of real‑estate projects as "financial creditors" under the Code, thereby permitting them to invoke …
Home buyers booked flats in various projects of the Amrapali Group of companies in Noida and Greater Noida, paying substantial amounts between 2010-2014. The builders failed to deliver possession within the promised 36 months and did not pay dues to the Noida and Greater Noida Authorities or repay …
The Association for Consumer Welfare and Aid filed a consumer complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) seeking possession of flats and restraint of extra charges, alleging that Three C Universal Developers Private Limited was the main promoter of the Lotus Panache …
Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (appellant) entered into a development agreement with Mr. Nusli Neville Wadia (respondent No.3), who later terminated the agreement and sought certified copies of the development plans, layouts and related documents filed with the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under …
Jaypee Infratech Ltd (JIL) defaulted on a loan from IDBI Bank, prompting the bank to initiate a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Home buyers filed a writ petition alleging that the CIRP ignored their interests and sought a pro‑rata …
