Appellant / Complainant
Amandeep Garg
Respondent
Supertech Township Project Limited, Regal Emporia Infratech Private Limited, Wealth Clinic Private Limited
supertech township project limited
Respondent
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 0901126025422022 by Amandeep Garg against Supertech Township Project Limited, Regal Emporia Infratech Private Limited, Wealth Clinic Private Limited before up_rera.
Hearing
The Tribunal has decided to keep the appeal in abeyance pending the decision of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) following the issuance of a moratorium order.
Hearing
The Tribunal has scheduled the appeal for orders on 15.01.2026.
Hearing
The Tribunal issued notice to respondent No. 3 and granted the respondent 10 days to file objections, scheduling the next hearing for December 8, 2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the second respondent and scheduled the appeal for hearing on 11.11.2025, noting that no further adjournments will be granted to the second respondent.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the respondent ten days' additional time to file objections to the memo of appeal and scheduled the matter for hearing on 15.10.2025.
Hearing
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to comply with the order regarding the filing of an affidavit of service for respondent no. 3.
Hearing
Both parties filed an adjournment application, and the Tribunal has rescheduled the appeal hearing to May 1, 2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the second respondent and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 08.04.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment and rescheduled the hearing for Appeal-303/2022 to 11.03.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 17.02.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent's counsel and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 29.01.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by both parties and rescheduled the hearing for January 7, 2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment filed by the respondent's counsel and rescheduled the appeal hearing for November 21, 2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant seven days to file an affidavit of service regarding respondent no. 3 and established a subsequent timeline for filing objections and replies, scheduling the next hearing for 18.10.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted the publication of notices in newspapers regarding respondent no. 3 and granted the appellant three days to file an affidavit of service, adjourning the matter to 09.09.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent due to illness and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 06.08.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to serve notice to the respondent via newspaper publication in one Hindi and one English newspaper and scheduled the next hearing for 04.07.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal rejected the appellant's request to treat service of notice via publication as sufficient because the newspaper used did not have adequate circulation in the respondent's area (Noida), and directed the appellant to take further steps.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the appellant permission to serve respondent no. 3 via publication in two widely circulated newspapers (one English and one Hindi) after obtaining approval for the notice draft from the Registrar.
Hearing
The Tribunal permitted the appellant to serve notice on respondent no.3 through publication in two newspapers (one English and one Hindi) after previous attempts via post and email failed. The matter is listed for orders on 06.03.2024.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a one-week extension to the appellant to file a reply to the respondent's objections and adjourned the matter to 30.10.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment from the appellant's counsel and rescheduled the appeal for hearing on 17.05.2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal directed the issuance of fresh notice to respondent no. 3 and outlined the procedural steps for service of notice and filing of objections by the parties.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the respondent three days to file objections and the appellant one week to file a reply, scheduling the next hearing for March 1, 2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a final 10-day extension to the appellant for filing a reply to the respondent's objections and scheduled the matter for hearing on 31.01.2023, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted.
to file objections and its reply
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to personal difficulty and allowed one week for the appellant to file a reply to the respondent's objections.
to file objections and its reply
The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file objections to the appeal and directed the exchange of soft copies and replies between counsel before the next hearing on 01.11.2022.
Notice
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the applicant and the lack of a request for adjournment.
Notice
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice to the respondent is sufficient via courier and email, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal subject to verification of defects and limitation.
Defect Removal
The Tribunal issued notice to the respondent and directed the appellant to rectify registry defects and complete service of the appeal via speed-post and email.
Tribunal Order #0901126025422022-01-05-2025
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to comply with the order regarding the filing of an affidavit of service for respondent no. 3.
Tribunal Order #0901126025422022-21-07-2022
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice to the respondent is sufficient via courier and email, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal subject to verification of defects and limitation.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to comply with the order regarding the filing of an affidavit of service for respondent no. 3. Awarded in favor of Respondent.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to comply with the order regarding the filing of an affidavit of service for respondent no. 3.
Ruling Awarded To
Respondent
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Suryansh Narula
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Harish Pandey
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (2)
The appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the appellant's failure to comply with the order regarding the filing of an affidavit of service for respondent no. 3.
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice to the respondent is sufficient via courier and email, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal subject to verification of defects and limitation.
Need to research all rulings for supertech township project limited?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.