Appellant / Complainant
U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad
Respondent
Manoj Kumar Shahi
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 0901126015172023 by U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad against Manoj Kumar Shahi before up_rera.
for delivery of Judgment/Order
The Tribunal allowed all 24 appeals and set aside the Adjudicating Officer's orders, ruling that the officer lacked jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession under the guise of compensation and that claims for structural defects must first be brought to the promoter's notice.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing 16 defective appeals, ruling that because the underlying orders were challenged on jurisdictional grounds, substantial justice must prevail over technical limitations to prevent a legal deadlock.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel due to illness and scheduled the defective appeal for hearing on 16.05.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and has scheduled the defective appeal for consideration of a delay condonation application on 10.05.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel on health grounds and scheduled the hearing for the application for condonation of delay for 24.04.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel and scheduled the hearing for the defective appeal, including the application for condonation of delay, on 19.03.2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal refers the parties to a previously passed order dated in Appeal No. D249/2023.
Delay condonation
The order is a procedural reference directing the parties to refer to a previously passed order dated in Appeal No. D249/2023.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted a request for an adjournment after the appellant's counsel confirmed service of the reply to the respondent, scheduling the hearing for November 9, 2023.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the appellant 10 days to file a reply to the respondent's objections and scheduled the matter for September 26, 2023, to consider the application for condonation of delay.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal listed the matter for 10.08.2023 to consider an application for condonation of delay and for a hearing.
For Order
The Tribunal recorded the respondent's undertaking to file objections within 10 days and scheduled the appeal for a hearing on 30.05.2023.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the respondent three days to file objections against the appeal and directed that a soft copy be emailed to the appellant's counsel. The matter is scheduled for hearing on 18.04.2023.
Tribunal Order #0901126015172023-12-06-2024
The Tribunal allowed all 24 appeals and set aside the Adjudicating Officer's orders, ruling that the officer lacked jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession under the guise of compensation and that claims for structural defects must first be brought to the promoter's notice.
Tribunal Order #0901126015172023-29-05-2024
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing 16 defective appeals, ruling that because the underlying orders were challenged on jurisdictional grounds, substantial justice must prevail over technical limitations to prevent a legal deadlock.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The Tribunal allowed all 24 appeals and set aside the Adjudicating Officer's orders, ruling that the officer lacked jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession under the guise of compensation and that claims for structural defects must first be brought to the promoter's notice. Awarded in favor of Appellant.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The Tribunal allowed all 24 appeals and set aside the Adjudicating Officer's orders, ruling that the officer lacked jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession under the guise of compensation and that claims for structural defects must first be brought to the promoter's notice.
Ruling Awarded To
Appellant
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Anurag Singh
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Pramod Mitra
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (2)
The Tribunal allowed all 24 appeals and set aside the Adjudicating Officer's orders, ruling that the officer lacked jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession under the guise of compensation and that claims for structural defects must first be brought to the promoter's notice.
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing 16 defective appeals, ruling that because the underlying orders were challenged on jurisdictional grounds, substantial justice must prevail over technical limitations to prevent a legal deadlock.
Need to research all rulings for a builder?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.