Appellant / Complainant
Harsh Lata Chhabra
Respondent
Gardenia Aims Development Pvt. Ltd.
gardenia aims development pvt. ltd.
₹37,24,911
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 0901126014162020 by Harsh Lata Chhabra against Gardenia Aims Development Pvt. Ltd. before up_rera.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal set aside the previous order and ruled that the appellant is entitled to interest (MCLR+1%) for the delay in possession from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016, while directing the Noida Authority to ensure the execution of the tripartite sub-lease deed.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request to list the case for orders/hearing on 14.07.2025 and directed the parties to exchange pleadings in the interim, noting that no further adjournments will be granted.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to amend the memo of appeal by adding additional prayers and directed the respondent to file objections to the amended memo.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request from the respondent's counsel to adjourn the appeal to 29.04.2025 and permitted the filing of objections in the interim.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 01.04.2025, while allowing the respondent to file objections to the amendment application.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment and rescheduled the hearing of Appeal-360/2020 to 05.03.2025, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted.
Further Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant seven days to file an amendment application and scheduled the matter to be listed before Bench No. 1 on 11.02.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant time to file an appropriate application and scheduled the next hearing for January 21, 2025.
Hearing
The tribunal adjourned the proceedings following an application by the respondent's counsel and scheduled the next hearing for December 12, 2024, noting that no further adjournments will be granted.
Hearing
The Tribunal listed the appeal for orders on 18.11.2024 and granted the respondent permission to file objections to the grounds of appeal in the interim.
Hearing
The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's amendment application as not pressed and granted both parties time to file supporting affidavits and replies to newly submitted documents.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the matter to 03.09.2024 following a joint request from counsel to clarify the status of a pending amendment application.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and, upon the appellant's request for urgency, scheduled the appeal for a final hearing on 29.08.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment from both parties and rescheduled the appeal for hearing/orders on 27.08.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted a request for adjournment from the respondent's counsel due to bereavement and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 25.07.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel on health grounds and rescheduled the hearing for 30.04.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal issued a routine procedural order to list the appeal for a hearing on 28.03.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and the appeal is ready for hearing, subsequently scheduling the matter for a hearing on 29.02.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel due to personal reasons and rescheduled the hearing for 24.07.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the parties 24 hours to file physical copies of objections and replies in the Registry, as only digital versions had been uploaded. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 21.07.2023.
Hearing
This text represents the header and cause title of an appeal (APPEAL-360/2020) before the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, involving Ms. Harsh Lata Chhabra versus M/S Gardenia Aims Development Pvt. Ltd., but contains no substantive ruling or directive.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the proceedings due to the appellant's counsel being on leave and scheduled the next hearing for 18.07.2023, warning that no further adjournments will be granted.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel one week to prepare the brief and scheduled the appeal for hearing on 22.03.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and scheduled the appeal for a hearing on 12.12.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the parties to exchange and submit a list of dates, events, and relied-upon judgments, and scheduled the appeal for hearing on 16.11.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal adjourned the appeal due to the non-appearance of parties and rescheduled the hearing for 20.10.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment application filed by the appellant's counsel and rescheduled the hearing for September 20, 2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment application filed by the appellant's counsel and rescheduled the hearing for 25.08.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the parties to file and exchange concise written arguments along with cited judgments within 20 days and scheduled the next hearing for 15.07.2022.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the parties to exchange and submit a list of dates, events, and relied-upon judgments, and scheduled the next hearing for May 5, 2022.
For Order
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the absence of the appellant and their counsel during the hearing.
Admission
The Tribunal adjourned the defective appeal to 23.03.2021 due to an advocates' strike and directed the parties to exchange pleadings in the interim.
Admission
The Tribunal granted the respondent one week to file objections to the appeal and directed the parties to exchange replies via email and upload documents to the e-portal before the next hearing on 02.03.2021.
Tribunal Order #0901126014162020-14-07-2025
The Tribunal set aside the previous order and ruled that the appellant is entitled to interest (MCLR+1%) for the delay in possession from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016, while directing the Noida Authority to ensure the execution of the tripartite sub-lease deed.
Tribunal Order #0901126014162020-29-04-2025
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to amend the memo of appeal by adding additional prayers and directed the respondent to file objections to the amended memo.
Tribunal Order #0901126014162020-23-03-2021
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the absence of the appellant and their counsel during the hearing.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Tribunal set aside the previous order and ruled that the appellant is entitled to interest (MCLR+1%) for the delay in possession from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016, while directing the Noida Authority to ensure the execution of the tripartite sub-lease deed. Awarded in favor of Appellant. Awarded interest rate: MCLR+1%.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Tribunal set aside the previous order and ruled that the appellant is entitled to interest (MCLR+1%) for the delay in possession from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016, while directing the Noida Authority to ensure the execution of the tripartite sub-lease deed.
Ruling Awarded To
Appellant
Awarded Interest Rate
MCLR+1%
Interest Period
from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- V K S Bisen
- Rohit Raj
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Ankit Raj Chaudhary
- Shuchita Singh
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (3)
The Tribunal set aside the previous order and ruled that the appellant is entitled to interest (MCLR+1%) for the delay in possession from 04.06.2014 to 04.10.2016, while directing the Noida Authority to ensure the execution of the tripartite sub-lease deed.
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to amend the memo of appeal by adding additional prayers and directed the respondent to file objections to the amended memo.
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the absence of the appellant and their counsel during the hearing.
Need to research all rulings for gardenia aims development pvt. ltd.?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.