up_reraStatus: Completed
CASE ID: 0901126041702022

Appellant / Complainant

U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad

VS

Respondent

Mamta Singh

Disposal Award

Appellant

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

Legal Issues & Claims Raised

Delay in PossessionDelay Compensation / InterestJurisdiction & Maintainability

Case Procedural History & Progression Tree

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

22 Milestones
Filing Phase

Complaint Filing & Dispute Registration

Complaint registered under Case ID 0901126041702022 by U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad against Mamta Singh before up_rera.

Delay in PossessionDelay Compensation / InterestJurisdiction & Maintainability
2
Stage 124/05/2024

for delivery of Judgment/Order

The Tribunal set aside eight orders passed by the Adjudicating Officer, ruling that the Adjudicating Officer lacks jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession when an allottee chooses to stay in a project; such determination falls under the exclusive power of the Regulatory Authority.

3
Stage 221/05/2024

For Order

The Tribunal heard arguments from the counsels representing both the appellant and the respondent and subsequently reserved the judgment.

4
Stage 307/05/2024

for delivery of Judgment/Order

The Tribunal allowed the application for condonation of delay and directed that orders be perused from a related case (Appeal No. D 98/2023).

5
Stage 401/03/2024

Hearing

The court heard arguments regarding the application for condonation of delay and has reserved its order on the matter.

6
Stage 521/02/2024

Hearing

The Tribunal has granted a request to list the defective appeal for consideration of an application for condonation of delay on 01.03.2024.

7
Stage 616/01/2024

Hearing

The Tribunal has scheduled the defective appeal for consideration of the application for condonation of delay on 21.02.2024.

8
Stage 712/10/2023

Hearing

No text available.

9
Stage 804/09/2023

Hearing

The Tribunal adjourned the proceedings due to a three-day strike called by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and rescheduled the hearing for 12.10.2023.

10
Stage 910/08/2023

Hearing

The Tribunal granted a request by the appellant's counsel to reschedule the appeal hearing to 04.09.2023.

11
Stage 1014/07/2023

Delay condonation

The Tribunal has rescheduled the hearing for the defective appeal to 10.08.2023 to consider the application for condonation of delay, following a joint request from both parties' counsels.

12
Stage 1102/05/2023

Delay condonation

The Tribunal noted that pleadings have been exchanged and scheduled the appeal for a hearing on 14.07.2023.

13
Stage 1221/03/2023

Delay condonation

No text available.

14
Stage 1310/02/2023

Delay condonation

No text available.

15
Stage 1406/01/2023

Delay condonation

No text available.

16
Stage 1506/12/2022

Delay condonation

No text available.

17
Stage 1610/11/2022

Delay condonation

The Tribunal granted the appellant's counsel 10 days to file a reply to the respondent's objections and scheduled the case for orders on December 6, 2022.

18
Stage 1729/09/2022

Delay condonation

The Tribunal granted the appellant 10 days to file a reply to the respondent's objections and scheduled the next hearing for November 10, 2022.

19
Stage 1802/09/2022

Notice

The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file objections to the application for condonation of delay and grounds of appeal, with a subsequent timeline set for the appellant's reply. The matter is scheduled for hearing on 29.09.2022.

20
Stage 1904/08/2022

Delay condonation

The Tribunal issued notice to the respondent regarding an application for condonation of delay and directed the applicant to serve the notice and appeal documents via speed-post and email.

21
Stage 20Final Ruling Order

Tribunal Order #0901126041702022-24-05-2024

The Tribunal set aside eight orders passed by the Adjudicating Officer, ruling that the Adjudicating Officer lacks jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession when an allottee chooses to stay in a project; such determination falls under the exclusive power of the Regulatory Authority.

Disposal Phase

Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling

The Tribunal set aside eight orders passed by the Adjudicating Officer, ruling that the Adjudicating Officer lacks jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession when an allottee chooses to stay in a project; such determination falls under the exclusive power of the Regulatory Authority. Awarded in favor of Appellant. Awarded interest rate: MCLR + 1%.

Disposal Winner: AppellantInterest Rate: MCLR + 1%Status: Completed

Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary

Official Ruling Summary

The Tribunal set aside eight orders passed by the Adjudicating Officer, ruling that the Adjudicating Officer lacks jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession when an allottee chooses to stay in a project; such determination falls under the exclusive power of the Regulatory Authority.

Ruling Awarded To

Appellant

Awarded Interest Rate

MCLR + 1%

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)

  • N N Pandey

Respondent Advocate(s)

  • Ram Nath Pandey

Official RERA Tribunal Orders (1)

FINAL_ORDEROrder ID: 0901126041702022-24-05-2024

The Tribunal set aside eight orders passed by the Adjudicating Officer, ruling that the Adjudicating Officer lacks jurisdiction to award interest for delayed possession when an allottee chooses to stay in a project; such determination falls under the exclusive power of the Regulatory Authority.

TathyaGrid RERA Intelligence AI

Need to research all rulings for a builder?

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

Open AI Workspace →