Appellant / Complainant
Raj Kumar Sharma
Respondent
Shine City Infraproject Pvt. Ltd.
shine city infraproject 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 0901126014102020 by Raj Kumar Sharma against Shine City Infraproject Pvt. Ltd. before up_rera.
to file objections and its reply
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because the respondent's project was not registered under the Act of 2016, rendering complaints before the Regulatory Authority non-maintainable per Supreme Court precedent. However, the appellant is permitted to raise registration issues through the administrative side of the Regulatory Authority.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that despite newspaper publication of notice, the respondent failed to appear; consequently, the matter is scheduled for hearing on 15.04.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the Registry to verify an affidavit of service filed via publication and ordered the matter to be listed on 12.01.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant one week to file an affidavit of service and scheduled the appeal for a hearing on 05.01.2022.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel one week to file an affidavit including a copy of the paper publication notice and scheduled the appeal for hearing on 13.12.2021.
For Order
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal to 23.11.2021 and directed the parties to exchange pleadings and file originals in the Registry at least one week before the next hearing.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant three days to file a newspaper notice published pursuant to a previous order and rescheduled the appeal hearing to November 2, 2021.
For Order
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to serve notice on the respondent through publication in two newspapers (one English and one Hindi) due to unsuccessful attempts at personal service.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel an additional week to file an application for the publication of notice and scheduled the next hearing for 16.09.2021.
For Order
The Tribunal granted an adjournment request from the appellant's counsel due to his LLM examination and rescheduled the hearing for April 2, 2021.
For Order
The case is adjourned because lawyers are abstaining from work due to a call by the Oudh Bar Association; the matter is rescheduled for 09.03.2021.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant one week to file an application for service of notice via publication due to an untraceable address, and rescheduled the matter for 24.02.2021.
Hearing on Appeal
The Tribunal noted that the notice sent to the respondent was returned as 'left' and directed the appellant to provide a correct address within one week for fresh service of notice.
Tribunal Order #0901126014102020-28-04-2022
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because the respondent's project was not registered under the Act of 2016, rendering complaints before the Regulatory Authority non-maintainable per Supreme Court precedent. However, the appellant is permitted to raise registration issues through the administrative side of the Regulatory Authority.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because the respondent's project was not registered under the Act of 2016, rendering complaints before the Regulatory Authority non-maintainable per Supreme Court precedent. However, the appellant is permitted to raise registration issues through the administrative side of the Regulatory Authority. Awarded in favor of Respondent.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because the respondent's project was not registered under the Act of 2016, rendering complaints before the Regulatory Authority non-maintainable per Supreme Court precedent. However, the appellant is permitted to raise registration issues through the administrative side of the Regulatory Authority.
Ruling Awarded To
Respondent
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Saurabh Misra
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (1)
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal because the respondent's project was not registered under the Act of 2016, rendering complaints before the Regulatory Authority non-maintainable per Supreme Court precedent. However, the appellant is permitted to raise registration issues through the administrative side of the Regulatory Authority.
Need to research all rulings for shine city infraproject pvt. ltd.?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.