up_reraStatus: Completed
CASE ID: 0901126035182021

Appellant / Complainant

Neetu Singh, Iconic Infrastate Pvt. Ltd., Iconic Infraestate Private Limited

VS

Respondent

Conic Infraestate Private Limited

Developer Firm

iconic infrastate pvt. ltd.

Disputed Amount

21,27,600

Disposal Award

Respondent

TathyaGrid Legal Copilot: Automated procedural intelligence extracted from official RERA tribunal records.
Analyze in Workspace

Legal Issues & Claims Raised

Delay in PossessionJurisdiction & Maintainability

Case Procedural History & Progression Tree

Visual step-by-step tree detailing dispute origin, interim hearings, and final tribunal ruling.

19 Milestones
Filing Phase

Complaint Filing & Dispute Registration

Complaint registered under Case ID 0901126035182021 by Neetu Singh, Iconic Infrastate Pvt. Ltd., Iconic Infraestate Private Limited against Conic Infraestate Private Limited before up_rera.

Delay in PossessionJurisdiction & Maintainability
2
Stage 103/04/2025

Hearing

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Regulatory Authority's decision, ruling that because the appellant had obtained a conveyance deed for the plot, they no longer qualified as an 'allottee' under the Act for the purpose of claiming possession of the Villa.

3
Stage 210/03/2025

Hearing

The Tribunal granted a request from the respondent's counsel to reschedule the hearing of Appeal-577/2021 to 03.04.2025.

4
Stage 313/02/2025

Hearing

The Tribunal ordered that the appeal shall proceed ex-parte against the respondent due to their failure to file objections, and scheduled the next hearing for 10.03.2025.

5
Stage 413/01/2025

Hearing

No text available.

6
Stage 506/12/2024

Hearing

The Respondent was granted a 10-day extension to file objections, with the appeal scheduled for hearing on January 13, 2025.

7
Stage 608/11/2024

Hearing

The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file objections and directed both parties to exchange pleadings before the next hearing on December 6, 2024.

8
Stage 718/08/2022

Further Order

The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the applicant.

9
Stage 807/07/2022

Hearing

The Tribunal adjourned the case due to the absence of both parties and rescheduled the hearing for 18.08.2022.

10
Stage 928/04/2022

Hearing

The Tribunal noted the absence of the respondent and directed that a 'Dasti' notice be issued to them, with the matter scheduled for further orders on 07.07.2022.

11
Stage 1015/04/2022

Hearing

No text available.

12
Stage 1122/02/2022

Hearing

This text is a formal heading/caption for an appeal before the U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal involving Neetu Singh versus Conic Infraestate Private Limited; no substantive ruling or directive is contained in this excerpt.

13
Stage 1212/01/2022

Hearing

No text available.

14
Stage 1317/12/2021

Hearing

The Tribunal issued a fresh notice to the respondent due to refusal of service and directed the parties to exchange pleadings regarding the application for condonation of delay via email before the next hearing on 12.01.2022.

15
Stage 1425/11/2021

Notice

No text available.

16
Stage 1505/10/2021

Notice

The Tribunal issued a notice to the respondent via registered post and email due to their non-appearance and scheduled the case for orders on 25.11.2021.

17
Stage 1610/09/2021

Delay condonation

The Tribunal issued notice to the respondent and scheduled the matter for 05.10.2021 to address the disposal of a limitation application.

18
Stage 17Final Ruling Order

Tribunal Order #0901126035182021-03-04-2025

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Regulatory Authority's decision, ruling that because the appellant had obtained a conveyance deed for the plot, they no longer qualified as an 'allottee' under the Act for the purpose of claiming possession of the Villa.

Disposal Phase

Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Regulatory Authority's decision, ruling that because the appellant had obtained a conveyance deed for the plot, they no longer qualified as an 'allottee' under the Act for the purpose of claiming possession of the Villa. Awarded in favor of Respondent.

Disposal Winner: RespondentStatus: Completed

Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary

Official Ruling Summary

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Regulatory Authority's decision, ruling that because the appellant had obtained a conveyance deed for the plot, they no longer qualified as an 'allottee' under the Act for the purpose of claiming possession of the Villa.

Ruling Awarded To

Respondent

Verified Tribunal DocumentationDownload Official Final Tribunal Order PDF

Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)

Section 18(1)Section 3Section 79

Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates

Appellant Advocate(s)

  • Ajit Shukla

Respondent Advocate(s)

  • Saurabh Misra
  • Krishna Kumar Singh

Official RERA Tribunal Orders (1)

FINAL_ORDEROrder ID: 0901126035182021-03-04-2025

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Regulatory Authority's decision, ruling that because the appellant had obtained a conveyance deed for the plot, they no longer qualified as an 'allottee' under the Act for the purpose of claiming possession of the Villa.

TathyaGrid RERA Intelligence AI

Need to research all rulings for iconic infrastate pvt. ltd.?

Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.

Open AI Workspace →