Appellant / Complainant
Jagdish Prasad
Respondent
SJP Infracon Limited
sjp infracon limited
₹46,66,636
Appellant
Legal Issues & Claims Raised
Case Procedural History & Progression Tree
Visual step-by-step tree detailing dispute origin, interim hearings, and final tribunal ruling.
Complaint Filing & Dispute Registration
Complaint registered under Case ID 0901126000202019 by Jagdish Prasad against SJP Infracon Limited before up_rera.
for delivery of Judgment/Order
The Tribunal set aside the previous order of the Regulatory Authority because it exceeded the original prayers made by the appellant, and instead directed the respondent to refund the entire deposited amount with interest at MCLR+1% per annum.
Hearing
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding an appeal against a RERA order that directed possession instead of a refund; the appellant seeks a full refund with interest, citing legal precedent.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal to 22.11.2021 because the appellant's counsel was in transit and other cases on the cause-list had already been taken up.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the respondent to provide specific details regarding super area and carpet area as previously ordered and mandated both parties to file and exchange a list of dates, events, and relied-upon cases before the next hearing.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel due to a medical emergency (eye operation) and rescheduled the hearing for 22.09.2021.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request from the appellant's counsel to adjourn the appeal and rescheduled the matter for hearing on 05.04.2021.
Hearing on Appeal
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with a previous directive to provide super area and carpet area details and directed both parties to file lists of dates and relied-upon judgments before the next hearing.
Tribunal Order #0901126000202019-20-11-2021
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding an appeal against a RERA order that directed possession instead of a refund; the appellant seeks a full refund with interest, citing legal precedent.
Tribunal Order #0901126000202019-15-03-2022
The Tribunal set aside the previous order of the Regulatory Authority because it exceeded the original prayers made by the appellant, and instead directed the respondent to refund the entire deposited amount with interest at MCLR+1% per annum.
Tribunal Order #0901126000202019-22-09-2021
The Tribunal directed the respondent to provide specific details regarding super area and carpet area as previously ordered and mandated both parties to file and exchange a list of dates, events, and relied-upon cases before the next hearing.
Tribunal Order #0901126000202019-02-02-2021
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with a previous directive to provide super area and carpet area details and directed both parties to file lists of dates and relied-upon judgments before the next hearing.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Tribunal set aside the previous order of the Regulatory Authority because it exceeded the original prayers made by the appellant, and instead directed the respondent to refund the entire deposited amount with interest at MCLR+1% per annum. Awarded in favor of Appellant. Awarded interest rate: MCLR+1% per annum.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Tribunal set aside the previous order of the Regulatory Authority because it exceeded the original prayers made by the appellant, and instead directed the respondent to refund the entire deposited amount with interest at MCLR+1% per annum.
Ruling Awarded To
Appellant
Awarded Interest Rate
MCLR+1% per annum
Interest Period
from the date of deposit till the refund of the amount
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Azhar Ikram
- Manish Singh
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Shashi Kant Verma
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (4)
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding an appeal against a RERA order that directed possession instead of a refund; the appellant seeks a full refund with interest, citing legal precedent.
The Tribunal set aside the previous order of the Regulatory Authority because it exceeded the original prayers made by the appellant, and instead directed the respondent to refund the entire deposited amount with interest at MCLR+1% per annum.
The Tribunal directed the respondent to provide specific details regarding super area and carpet area as previously ordered and mandated both parties to file and exchange a list of dates, events, and relied-upon cases before the next hearing.
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with a previous directive to provide super area and carpet area details and directed both parties to file lists of dates and relied-upon judgments before the next hearing.
Need to research all rulings for sjp infracon limited?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.