Advertisement
What really powers the cloud? Behind every Google search, A...
A lot of what defines a home isn’t visible at handover. I...
Private equity has played a significant role in shaping Indi...
Luxury real estate is one of the most talked-about segments ...
Airports play a much bigger role than just enabling travel -...
To file an appeal in response to a ruling by the Assam REAT, the RERA Tribunal has directly M/s Arya Erectors India Pvt Ltd to deposit a sum of Rs 32 lacs in an escrow account with them. The company is challenging the order passed by the REAT which stated that the company must pay Rs 1.5 crores to a disgruntled homeowner who had purchased a villa from them for delayed possession. The REAT also slapped an additional penalty of Rs 1.5 lacs on the company for other charges. Section 43 of the RERA Act 2016 requires a promoter to first deposit with the Appellate Tribunal at least 30 per cent of the penalty or as determined by the Appellate Tribunal before challenging any penalty imposed by them.
In order to file an appeal in response to a ruling by the Assam REAT, the Tribunal has directly M/s Arya Erectors India Pvt Ltd to deposit a sum of Rs 32 lacs in an escrow account with them. The company is challenging the order passed by the REAT which stated that the company must pay Rs 1.5 crores to a disgruntled homeowner who had purchased a villa from them for delayed possession. The REAT also slapped an additional penalty of Rs 1.5 lacs on the company for other charges.
Advertisement
Section 43 of the RERA Act 2016 requires a promoter to first deposit with the Appellate Tribunal at least 30 per cent of the penalty or as determined by the Appellate Tribunal before challenging any penalty imposed by them. This rule also applies to cases wherein the promoter is attempting to challenge an order directing them to pay money to an allottee which includes interest and compensation. Justice (Retd.) Manojit Bhuyan, Chairperson, and Onkar Kedia, Member, drew support for their decision from the Supreme Court of India's ruling in Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of UP and Others on November 11, 2021, which held that the pre-deposit required under Section 43(5) of the Act is never burdensome or in violation of Articles 14 or 19(1)(g) of the Indian Constitution.
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
