Appellant / Complainant
Ranjit Singh Kalra
Respondent
Shalimar Lake City Pvt. Ltd.
shalimar lake city pvt. ltd.
₹1,55,000
Respondent
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 0901126002162019 by Ranjit Singh Kalra against Shalimar Lake City Pvt. Ltd. before up_rera.
Hearing
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was neither an 'allottee' nor an 'aggrieved person' under the RERA Act 2016 regarding the specific project in question, as his original booking was with a different entity for a separate, defunct township.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request by the appellant's counsel to list the appeal for final hearing on 12.12.2024, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to illness and rescheduled the matter for orders on 18.11.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the respondent 7 days to supply a copy of their objection and directed both parties to upload all pleadings and documents to the portal within 7 days. The case is scheduled for hearing on 03.10.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel and scheduled the matter for hearing on 09.09.2024, providing a final opportunity to the respondent to argue.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel on health grounds and rescheduled the hearing for 12.07.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to his unavailability and scheduled the hearing for May 21, 2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the matter to 24.04.2024 following a request for adjournment from the respondent's counsel on health grounds and the absence of the appellant.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel on health grounds and rescheduled the hearing for 24.03.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment from the appellant's counsel and rescheduled the hearing of the appeal to 27.02.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to personal difficulties and rescheduled the hearing for November 1, 2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel additional time to prepare the case file and rescheduled the hearing for 20.09.2023.
Hearing
The tribunal adjourned the proceedings due to a request from the appellant on health grounds and rescheduled the matter for orders/hearing on 25.08.2023.
Hearing
Due to the previous Presiding Member demitting office before delivering a reserved judgment, the Tribunal has ordered a fresh hearing of the appeal on 07.07.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the matter due to lack of time and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on February 9, 2023.
Arguments
The Tribunal heard arguments from both parties and directed them to exchange lists of dates, events, and relied cases, allowing 20 days for filing additional documents before reserving the judgment.
Final Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the case to 19.04.2022 for arguments and directed both parties to file relevant rulings on the points in question before the next hearing.
Final Hearing
The Tribunal granted the respondent's counsel additional time to prepare his brief and rescheduled the appeal hearing for 19.01.2022, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted on that date.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and adjourned the matter to 07.01.2022 for a final hearing before Bench No. 1.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant due to illness and rescheduled the hearing for December 3, 2021.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the Respondent's Managing Director or an authorized person to appear in person on the next hearing date, warning that failure to do so will result in adverse inference due to the Respondent's lack of progress toward settlement.
Further Order
The Tribunal ruled that the moratorium declared against M/S M-Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. does not affect the present case against respondent M/S Shalimar Lake City Pvt. Ltd., and directed the respondent to file a reply to the appeal.
Tribunal Order #0901126002162019-12-12-2024
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was neither an 'allottee' nor an 'aggrieved person' under the RERA Act 2016 regarding the specific project in question, as his original booking was with a different entity for a separate, defunct township.
Tribunal Order #0901126002162019-05-02-2021
The Tribunal ruled that the moratorium declared against M/S M-Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. does not affect the present case against respondent M/S Shalimar Lake City Pvt. Ltd., and directed the respondent to file a reply to the appeal.
Tribunal Order #0901126002162019-24-09-2021
The Tribunal directed the Respondent's Managing Director or an authorized person to appear in person on the next hearing date, warning that failure to do so will result in adverse inference due to the Respondent's lack of progress toward settlement.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was neither an 'allottee' nor an 'aggrieved person' under the RERA Act 2016 regarding the specific project in question, as his original booking was with a different entity for a separate, defunct township. Awarded in favor of Respondent.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was neither an 'allottee' nor an 'aggrieved person' under the RERA Act 2016 regarding the specific project in question, as his original booking was with a different entity for a separate, defunct township.
Ruling Awarded To
Respondent
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Vaibhav Krishna
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Anurag Singh
- Shreya Mehrotra
- Praniti Agarwal
- Unnati Vijay
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (3)
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was neither an 'allottee' nor an 'aggrieved person' under the RERA Act 2016 regarding the specific project in question, as his original booking was with a different entity for a separate, defunct township.
The Tribunal ruled that the moratorium declared against M/S M-Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. does not affect the present case against respondent M/S Shalimar Lake City Pvt. Ltd., and directed the respondent to file a reply to the appeal.
The Tribunal directed the Respondent's Managing Director or an authorized person to appear in person on the next hearing date, warning that failure to do so will result in adverse inference due to the Respondent's lack of progress toward settlement.
Need to research all rulings for shalimar lake city pvt. ltd.?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.