Appellant / Complainant
Pabitra Mohan Swain
Respondent
Aadhar Infroholding Limited
aadhar infroholding 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 0901126039082021 by Pabitra Mohan Swain against Aadhar Infroholding Limited before up_rera.
Hearing
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to his father's illness and rescheduled the hearing for July 5, 2023.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted that the matter is proceeding ex-parte against the respondent and scheduled the appeal for an ex-parte hearing on 27.04.2023.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel one week to prepare his brief and rescheduled the appeal hearing for February 8, 2023.
For Order
The Tribunal granted the appellant a one-week extension to comply with a previous order dated 30.09.2022 and scheduled the next hearing for 09.01.2023.
For Order
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to illness and rescheduled the hearing for December 7, 2022.
For Order
The Tribunal has ordered the appeal to be listed for a subsequent hearing on 17.11.2022.
Ex-Parte
The Tribunal directed the appellant to file an affidavit detailing the history of previous RERA orders and hearing dates following the rejection of their complaint for want of prosecution.
Ex-Parte
The proceedings are adjourned because the appellant's counsel was delayed by a traffic jam; the matter is rescheduled for 30.09.2022.
Ex-Parte
The proceedings are adjourned due to a request for adjournment by the appellant's counsel on the grounds of illness, with the matter rescheduled for orders on 13.09.2022.
Ex-Parte
The tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the appellant's counsel due to injury and scheduled the matter for an ex-parte hearing on 18.08.2022.
Defect Removal
The Tribunal condoned a 34-day delay in filing the appeal, citing Supreme Court precedents regarding limitation extensions, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal adjourned the matter due to the non-appearance of parties and rescheduled the case for hearing on 25.07.2022.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice via newspaper publication is sufficient as the respondent failed to appear, and directed that the matter may proceed ex parte if no objections are filed by the next hearing.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal allowed the appellant's application to serve notice on the respondent via publication in one Hindi and one English newspaper, directing the filing of an affidavit of publication before the next hearing on 23.05.2022.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal questioned the appellant regarding potential heavy costs for delay in filing a service application and directed the Registry to scrutinize the newly uploaded publication application.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted a request for adjournment by the applicant's counsel and rescheduled the hearing to 18.04.2022.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the appellant one week to file an application for substituted service via newspaper publication after notice could not be served personally on the respondent. The matter is listed for further orders on 05.04.2022.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal directed the appellant to take necessary steps to serve notice to the respondent within 10 days and scheduled the case for 09.02.2022 to address the application for limitation.
Further Order
The Tribunal directed the applicant to take necessary steps regarding a report within 10 days and scheduled the matter for further orders on 11.01.2022.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal issued notice to the respondent via registered post and email and scheduled the defective appeal for 08.12.2021 to address the limitation application.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal issued a notice to the respondent regarding an application for condonation of delay and directed the applicant to serve the respondent via speed post and email before the next hearing on 16.11.2021.
Tribunal Order #0901126039082021-05-07-2023
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel.
Tribunal Order #0901126039082021-25-07-2022
The Tribunal condoned a 34-day delay in filing the appeal, citing Supreme Court precedents regarding limitation extensions, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
Tribunal Order #0901126039082021-18-04-2022
The Tribunal questioned the appellant regarding potential heavy costs for delay in filing a service application and directed the Registry to scrutinize the newly uploaded publication application.
Tribunal Order #0901126039082021-23-05-2022
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice via newspaper publication is sufficient as the respondent failed to appear, and directed that the matter may proceed ex parte if no objections are filed by the next hearing.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel. Awarded in favor of Respondent.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel.
Ruling Awarded To
Respondent
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- Piyush Verma
- Mandeep Kalra
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Piyush Verma
- Mandeep Kalra
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (4)
The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution due to the non-appearance of the appellant or their counsel.
The Tribunal condoned a 34-day delay in filing the appeal, citing Supreme Court precedents regarding limitation extensions, and directed the Registry to convert the defective appeal into a regular appeal.
The Tribunal questioned the appellant regarding potential heavy costs for delay in filing a service application and directed the Registry to scrutinize the newly uploaded publication application.
The Tribunal ruled that service of notice via newspaper publication is sufficient as the respondent failed to appear, and directed that the matter may proceed ex parte if no objections are filed by the next hearing.
Need to research all rulings for aadhar infroholding limited?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.