Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Man Global Limited, filed two second appeals under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) challenging an order dated 2nd May 2019 passed by the Administrative Member of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai. The impugned order refused to condone a delay of 62 days in filing an appeal by the appellant. The appellant contended that the order was passed by a sole member, which was contrary to Section 43(3) of RERA, which requires that every order of the Appellate Tribunal be signed by the Chairperson and the Members constituting the Bench, and that the Tribunal must consist of a Chairperson and at least two Members. The respondent argued that the Administrative Member had the authority to decide such applications. The Court framed a substantial question of law: whether a sole member of the Tribunal can decide any appeal or application for condonation of delay, or whether such matters must be heard by a Bench comprising two members including one judicial member. After hearing arguments, the Court held that Section 43(3) of RERA is mandatory and requires that the Tribunal function as a Bench of at least two members, including one judicial member. The order passed by the sole Administrative Member was without jurisdiction and void ab initio. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Tribunal for fresh consideration by a properly constituted Bench. The appeals were allowed, and the civil applications were disposed of.
Headnote
A) Real Estate Law - Appellate Tribunal - Composition - Section 43(3) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The issue was whether a sole Administrative Member of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal could decide an appeal or an application for condonation of delay. The Court held that Section 43(3) mandates that every order of the Appellate Tribunal shall be signed by the Chairperson and the Members constituting the Bench, and that the Tribunal shall consist of a Chairperson and at least two Members. The Court interpreted that the Tribunal must function as a Bench of at least two members, including one judicial member, to validly adjudicate any matter. The order passed by the sole Administrative Member was held to be without jurisdiction and void ab initio. (Paras 1-6) B) Real Estate Law - Condonation of Delay - Jurisdiction - Section 43(3) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 - The appellant challenged an order refusing condonation of delay passed by a sole Administrative Member. The Court held that such an order is invalid as the Tribunal was not properly constituted. The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration by a properly constituted Bench. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a sole member of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal can decide any appeal or application for condonation of delay or any application contemplated under the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 or the same has to be heard and can be disposed of only by the Bench comprising of two members including one judicial member?
Final Decision
The Court allowed the appeals, set aside the impugned order dated 2nd May 2019, and remanded the matter to the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration by a properly constituted Bench in accordance with law. The civil applications were disposed of.
Law Points
- Real Estate Appellate Tribunal must consist of a Bench of two members including one judicial member to hear appeals or applications for condonation of delay
- Section 43(3) of RERA is mandatory
- Order passed by sole Administrative Member is without jurisdiction and void ab initio
