New Delhi: In what can be relieved for home buyers and blocking builders from ordinary resort practices for long legal roads by challenging the command of the Rera authorities, the Supreme Court in the recent judgment has upheld the provisions in the Real Estate Law, which Make it mandatory for builders to deposit full compensation and interest ordered by the regulator or at least 30% of the penalty as pre-conditions to challenge the order before the appeal authority.
The court has also upheld the provisions that the Appellate Authority has the freedom to increase deposits must exceed 30%.
While the penalty applied by the authorities of the Rera goes to Indian consolidation funds or state accounts, refunds are customer rights.
Home buyer organizations said this assessment by the bench of three members, led by justice, you are on Thursday, will end customer abuse because the builder finds it a better choice to challenge the amount of refund to the buyer.
SC argues that the pre-deposit conditions imposed on the promoter to appeal based on Section 43 (5) real estate actions (regulations and development) are not discriminatory and violations of constitutional provisions.
The Court observed: “The legislature seems to ensure that the rights of decree holders (successful parties) must be protected and only the original Bona Fide appeal must be entertained …
Instant law intention seems to be that the promoters must show their bona fence By depositing the estimated amount.
“Abhay Upadhyay, President of PFCE, the home of the home buyer’s umbrella, said,” This is a rating of landmarks.
We can now hope that this clogs all the gaps and builders must deposit a full refund ordered by the Rera Authority before appealing .
It will also filter the appeal which is only intended to harass the buyer of the house.
“Pre-deposit provisions are carried out to ensure that the money that has been calculated by the authority must be kept so that consumers do not have to run from the pillar to the post to get maturity, if the appellate authority continues the order buyer.
SC also upholds the retroactive application of the Rera to the ongoing real estate project at the start of the Act.
Previously, Bombay HC had provided a similar order when different builders challenged the application of laws to projects that had begun when the law was notified.
Ruling SC can prevent builders from challenging Rera orders
