Dedicated locality research platform
Dedicated locality research platform
Enter your email address and you will receive
a link to reset your password
In a recent development, a developer has taken a decisive step by filing a complaint against a presiding officer of the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) court, alleging biased behavior and favoritism. The accused officer is now facing scrutiny over these serious allegations.
As a consequence of the developer's complaint, the RERA court has taken action by declaring the developer as non-compliant for failing to adhere to its previous orders. This decision has prompted the issuance of notices to all directors of the builder group, as well as their chartered accountants, instructing them to attend the forthcoming hearing. This move indicates the seriousness with which the RERA court is approaching the allegations and the importance of ensuring a fair and unbiased judicial process.
Salwinder Singh Sohata, a prominent member of the RERA court, has expressed his disappointment with the lack of compliance demonstrated by the developer regarding the earlier decision made on the petition. Sohata perceives this non-compliance as an act of defiance, emphasizing the importance of respecting and implementing court orders to maintain the integrity of the legal system.
According to a RERA officer, the petition against the developer was initially filed by an aggrieved party seeking a full refund with interest due to the non-delivery of a flat within the stipulated timeframe of a residential project. After carefully considering the petition, the authority members deliberated and issued an order on April 6, 2023, demanding the builder group to refund the money to the complainant, albeit without any interest.
Shockingly, despite the court's clear directive, the builder group failed to reimburse the complainant as instructed. Instead, the group chose to express their discontent by filing a complaint letter with the authority, specifically targeting RERA member Sohata and accusing him of delivering a biased decision. The builder’s-chartered accountants and representatives further claimed that they had requested an additional hearing date, but their plea was allegedly ignored, resulting in what they considered an unfair verdict.
It is worth noting that this is not the first instance of petitions being filed with the RERA authority regarding delayed possession of flats in the same project. Two prior cases have also been brought to the attention of the authority, with the petitioners seeking a refund of their deposited money due to the builder's failure to deliver the flats within the agreed-upon timeframe. However, in response, the builder presented their side of the story, asserting that the project had indeed been completed and requested that possession be granted. Consequently, the RERA authority ruled in favor of the builder in these cases, denying the refund and ordering the delivery of the flats.
The current complaint against the presiding officer has brought attention to the overall functioning and credibility of the RERA court. It underscores the importance of maintaining an unbiased and fair judicial system, free from any semblance of favoritism. The upcoming hearing and subsequent actions taken by the RERA court will likely have far-reaching implications, not only for this particular case but also for the broader perception of the authority and its commitment to ensuring justice in the real estate sector.
Propscience is India’s dedicated property news portal. We cover the latest events, news, trends, deals, new launches and more.
All our services and tools are completely free of cost and available 24X7!
