Decision given by Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Gandhinagar in case of M/s Bhupatbhai Kalyanbhai Vekariya V. Shivdhara Heights, Surat & Chairperson and Members of Gujarat Real Estate Authority
Following Principle emerged from the decision
1. Whether GUJ RERA should give opportunity to the complainant seeking non-granting of RERA registration to a particular project on account of disputed ownership of Land?
Yes, as per the Principle laid down by Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Gandhinagar in case of M/s Bhupatbhai Kalyanbhai Vekariya V. Shivdhara Heights, Surat & Chairperson and Members of Gujarat Real Estate Authority – GUJ RERA shall give opportunity to the complainant. In fact, specific directions are given to GUJ RERA in the above mentioned wherein the complainant must get sufficient opportunity to present its case before GUJ RERA and accordingly registration should be granted within the Provisions of Law.
2. Whether GUJ RERA can pass order for Stay construction? Or Whether GUJ RERA can pass order when the case is pending before Civil court or criminal court?
No – GUJ RERA does not have authority to order for stay construction for any project, also GUJ RERA cannot pass order when the case is pending before civil court or criminal court, as per the Principle laid down by Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Gandhinagar in case of M/s Bhupatbhai Kalyanbhai Vekariya V. Shivdhara Heights, Surat & Chairperson and Members of Gujarat Real Estate Authority
|Appeal||Bhupatbhai Kalyanbhai Vekariya (the appellant) filed a complaint before GUJ
RERA authorities. After considering the complaint order was passed by the relevant Authorities. Being aggrieved by the Order Passed by Gujarat Real Estate Authority. The appellant filed a complaint under section 44(1) of The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 before Gujarat Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Gandhinagar.
|Facts of Case||During 1994 to 1998 five societies were developed by organizers. The Organizers and their authorized people have sold the plots and have received full payment from the plot holders.
Now SUDA (Surat urban Development Authorities) have reserved the plots and therefore the plot holders were not allotted the plots. The Organizers Promised the plot holder that plot will be allotted once SUDA will withdraw the reservation.In 2004 SUDA has removed the reservation, the organizer has approved their layout plan in SUDA. Subsequently, even after withdrawal of reservation the plots were not allotted to plot holders and in fact, they were categorically denied with replies that “Plot holder can complain the matter in any government authorities”.
Further, the Plot holder came to know from reliable sources that organizer have given the plots to Shiv Dara Developers for Construction of high rise apartment.
|Contention of the Promoter||Five plot holders have mutual filed FIR against the Organizer. Further, complaint was filed before RERA Authorities for not giving the registration to Shiv dhara heights, issue of order for stay construction and accordingly adjudicate the matter.|
|Contention of the Department||No specific contention mentioned in the Judgement. However, following order
was passed by the Authorities: –
|Principle Laid down by Appellate Tribunal||The tribunal agreed with finding mentioned in Sr. No.2 and 3. However, in the
interest of justice the tribunal gave following directions to RERA for issue no. 1 or registration to Shiv Dhara heights as under: –
Note : – The above case pertains to complain filed for disputed title of Land ownership. Since 1998 the Plot Purchase is seeking the allotment of plot. If the apprehension raised by the justice seeker is found to be true after verification of documents related to the transaction, then in such scenario – it can be rightly said that due to the lack of proper mechanism of addressing such victims the Promotor of such kind can rig the industry. The implementation of law is still inchoate. However, the Principal laid down by Supreme court of India in case of Bikram Chatterji vs Union Of India may be applicable to such cases.