Appellant / Complainant
Plaza Fincap Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent
Logix City Developers Pvt. Ltd.
logix city developers pvt. ltd.
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 0901126003722019 by Plaza Fincap Pvt. Ltd. against Logix City Developers Pvt. Ltd. before up_rera.
Hearing
The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal as the underlying dispute was resolved during NCLT proceedings and possession of the unit was granted; consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeal as not pressed.
Hearing
The matter was adjourned due to the absence of parties, with the appeal rescheduled for hearing on 19.09.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted the absence of counsel for both parties and adjourned the appeal to 10.08.2023 for orders/hearing.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the appellant to file the NCLT moratorium order regarding the respondent and adjourned the matter to 30.05.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to illness and rescheduled the hearing for 24.04.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel and rescheduled the hearing for 16.03.2023, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted on that date.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal due to the absence of parties and rescheduled the hearing for February 7, 2023.
Further Order
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding a dispute over the validity of an offer of possession and the calculation of interest (MCLR + 1%) following a Regulatory Authority order, subsequently reserving judgment.
Further Order
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall its previous order, ruling that summoning the MD/CEO/Director of the builder-company to clarify possession and completion status is justifiable under the law. The MD/CEO/Managing Director is directed to appear in person at the next hearing.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the respondent's counsel to pay previously imposed costs before the next hearing and scheduled a recall application for 10.11.2021.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the MD/CEO/Director of the respondent builder-company to appear in person and warned that failure to do so will result in adverse inferences being drawn against them.
Hearing
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the respondent for repeated failure to appear in person as previously directed and ordered the MD/CEO/Director to appear at the next hearing or face adverse inferences.
Further Hearing
The appeal is adjourned due to lawyers abstaining from work in support of a call by the Oudh Bar Association; the matter is rescheduled for hearing on 19.03.2021.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with the previous order dated 04.01.2021 and directed the respondent's M.D., C.E.O., or Director to appear in person on the next hearing date to provide clarity regarding the offer of possession and project completion.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-29-10-2021
The Tribunal directed the respondent's counsel to pay previously imposed costs before the next hearing and scheduled a recall application for 10.11.2021.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-17-09-2021
The Tribunal directed the MD/CEO/Director of the respondent builder-company to appear in person and warned that failure to do so will result in adverse inferences being drawn against them.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-14-12-2021
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding a dispute over the validity of an offer of possession and the calculation of interest (MCLR + 1%) following a Regulatory Authority order, subsequently reserving judgment.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-20-11-2021
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall its previous order, ruling that summoning the MD/CEO/Director of the builder-company to clarify possession and completion status is justifiable under the law. The MD/CEO/Managing Director is directed to appear in person at the next hearing.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-19-03-2021
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the respondent for repeated failure to appear in person as previously directed and ordered the MD/CEO/Director to appear at the next hearing or face adverse inferences.
Tribunal Order #0901126003722019-10-02-2021
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with the previous order dated 04.01.2021 and directed the respondent's M.D., C.E.O., or Director to appear in person on the next hearing date to provide clarity regarding the offer of possession and project completion.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
Dismissed as not pressed Awarded in favor of Respondent.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
Dismissed as not pressed
Ruling Awarded To
Respondent
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Azhar Ikram
- Manish Singh
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Mandeep Singh
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (6)
The Tribunal directed the respondent's counsel to pay previously imposed costs before the next hearing and scheduled a recall application for 10.11.2021.
The Tribunal directed the MD/CEO/Director of the respondent builder-company to appear in person and warned that failure to do so will result in adverse inferences being drawn against them.
The Tribunal heard arguments regarding a dispute over the validity of an offer of possession and the calculation of interest (MCLR + 1%) following a Regulatory Authority order, subsequently reserving judgment.
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall its previous order, ruling that summoning the MD/CEO/Director of the builder-company to clarify possession and completion status is justifiable under the law. The MD/CEO/Managing Director is directed to appear in person at the next hearing.
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the respondent for repeated failure to appear in person as previously directed and ordered the MD/CEO/Director to appear at the next hearing or face adverse inferences.
The Tribunal noted the respondent's failure to comply with the previous order dated 04.01.2021 and directed the respondent's M.D., C.E.O., or Director to appear in person on the next hearing date to provide clarity regarding the offer of possession and project completion.
Need to research all rulings for logix city developers pvt. ltd.?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.