Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Adam A. Jumma, proprietor of Aman Builders and Developers, Goa, filed two second appeals under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act) in the Bombay High Court. Second Appeal No.726 of 2022 challenged the judgment and order dated 28th April 2022 passed by the learned Adjudicating Officer, Goa RERA in Case No.4/RERA/Adj. Matters(11)/2021/356, as well as the order dated 8th September 2022 passed by the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (acting as Goa Appellate Tribunal) in M.A. No.671/2022 in M.A. No.672/2022 in Appeal G-04/2022. Second Appeal No.727 of 2022 challenged the order dated 29th October 2021 passed by the learned Member, Goa RERA in F.No.3/RERA/Complaint(123)/2020/655, and the order dated 8th September 2022 passed by the same Appellate Tribunal in M.A. No.669/2022 in M.A. No.670/2022 in Appeal G-04/2022. The core legal issue was whether a second appeal under Section 58 of the RERA Act lies to the High Court against an order of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal passed under Section 43(5) of the Act. The appellant argued that Section 58 provides for an appeal to the High Court from any order of the Appellate Tribunal. The respondent contended that Section 58 only permits an appeal against an order of the Adjudicating Officer under Section 30, and not against an order of the Appellate Tribunal under Section 43(5). The Court analyzed the scheme of the RERA Act, noting that Section 43(5) declares that orders of the Appellate Tribunal are final and binding. Section 58 specifically states that an appeal lies to the High Court from an order of the Adjudicating Officer under Section 30, but does not mention appeals from the Appellate Tribunal. The Court held that the Act does not provide for a second appeal to the High Court against orders of the Appellate Tribunal. The remedy of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution remains available. Consequently, both second appeals were dismissed as not maintainable, and the interim applications were disposed of.
Headnote
A) Real Estate Law - Maintainability of Second Appeal - Section 58 of RERA Act - Interpretation - The issue was whether a second appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 lies to the High Court against an order of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal passed under Section 43(5) of the Act. The Court held that Section 58 only provides for an appeal to the High Court against an order of the Adjudicating Officer under Section 30, and not against an order of the Appellate Tribunal under Section 43(5). The scheme of the Act indicates that the Appellate Tribunal's order under Section 43(5) is final and binding, subject only to the power of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Therefore, the second appeals were not maintainable. (Paras 1-46) B) Real Estate Law - Finality of Appellate Tribunal Orders - Section 43(5) of RERA Act - The Court examined the scheme of the RERA Act and concluded that the orders of the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal under Section 43(5) are final and binding between the parties. The Act does not provide for any further appeal to the High Court against such orders. The remedy of judicial review under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution remains available. (Paras 30-46)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a second appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 lies to the High Court against an order passed by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal under Section 43(5) of the RERA Act?
Final Decision
Both second appeals are dismissed as not maintainable. Interim applications are disposed of.
Law Points
- Interpretation of Section 58 of RERA Act
- Maintainability of Second Appeal
- Jurisdiction of High Court under RERA Act
- Finality of orders of Real Estate Appellate Tribunal
