Search Results for "Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal"

109 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 109 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Second Appeals in RERA Execution Case, Holding Order XXI Rule 32(5) CPC Applicable. The court set aside the Appellate Tribunal's order disallowing amendment to execution applications seeking construction by decree holders at promoter's cost.

The case involves five second appeals filed by allottees (Rajan Chandiramani, Jagruti Parikh and Anr., Priyanka Waghela, Srichand Makhija, and Jayesh ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Promoter's Appeal in RERA Case, Holding That Acceptance of Delayed Possession Without Protest Does Not Waive Right to Interest Under Section 18 of RERA. Statutory Right to Interest Under RERA Cannot Be Waived by Mere Acceptance of Possession Without a Clear Agreement.

The case involves a Second Appeal filed by CCI Projects Private Limited (the promoter) against an order of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribu...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Developer's Maintainability Challenge and Upholds RERA Recovery Certificate in Allottee Refund Case. Real Estate Regulatory Authority Has Power to Issue Recovery Certificate Under Section 40(1) of RERA Act, 2016 for Refund Orders.

The judgment pertains to two connected matters: an Interim Application filed by the developer, Marvel Sigma Homes Pvt. Ltd., challenging the maintaina...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in RERA Case Due to Invalid Tribunal Composition. Sole Administrative Member Cannot Decide Condonation Application Under Section 43(3) of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

The appellant, Man Global Limited, filed two second appeals under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) challeng...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeals by Developer in Possession Suits — Concurrent Findings of Fact Cannot Be Reopened Under Section 100 CPC. Suits for possession based on title and prior possession were decreed; no substantial question of law arose.

The appellant, M/s. Samruddhi Developers, a partnership firm, filed four second appeals under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challe...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Holds Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Appoint Court Receiver Under Section 17 of Arbitration Act. Court Receiver is an Officer of the High Court Subject Only to Chief Justice's Supervision.

The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay filed a Report seeking directions on whether the Registry should accept matters where an Arbitral Tribunal appo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Appeal Seeking Permanent Stay of Winding Up of Svadeshi Mills Company Limited. Section 466 of Companies Act, 1956 does not permit stay of winding up after assets have been sold and substantial progress made in liquidation.

The case concerns an appeal against the dismissal of a company application under Section 466 of the Companies Act, 1956, seeking a permanent stay of t...