Search Results for "Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Issues Notice in Service Matter Challenging Deletion of Names ...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Appeals Against Ex Parte Interim Injunction in Pr...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Private Complaint Case — T...
High Court of Karnataka Allows Revision Petition in Private Complaint Case — T...

Search Results for "Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal"

85 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 85 result(s)

High Court

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.

24 Jun 2026

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

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Promoter's Appeal in RERA Delayed Possession Case, Upholds Allottees' Right to Interest. Section 18 of RERA Overrides Section 55 of Contract Act; Acceptance of Delayed Possession Does Not Waive Right to Compensation.

18 Jun 2026

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

High Court

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.

18 Jun 2026

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

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Promoter's Appeal in Real Estate Regulation Case, Upholding Authority's Jurisdiction and Pre-deposit Condition. The court affirmed that a single member of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority has jurisdiction to order refunds under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016, and the pre-deposit requirement under Section 43(5) is valid for statutory appeals.

11 Nov 2021

The dispute arose from appeals filed by promoters and real estate developers against orders of the High Court of Allahabad, which had dismissed their ...

High Court

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.

1 Oct 2019

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

High Court

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.

17 Sep 2019

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

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Lavasa Corporation's Second Appeals Against RERA Orders, Holding That RERA Has No Jurisdiction Over Complaints Filed Before Its Establishment. The Court ruled that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority cannot entertain complaints regarding agreements executed prior to the commencement of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

7 Aug 2018

The judgment involves three second appeals filed by Lavasa Corporation Limited against orders of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) and the A...

High Court

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.

16 Mar 2017

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

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Petitions Challenging Eviction Proceedings Under Public Premises Act Against Pre-Nationalisation Tenants. Pre-nationalisation tenants cannot be treated as unauthorised occupants under the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, and the Estate Officer who recommended eviction is biased.

23 Feb 2015

The petitioners, pre-nationalisation tenants of premises belonging to Dena Bank, challenged eviction proceedings initiated against them under the Publ...

High Court

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.

23 Aug 2013

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...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)