Delhi High Court
M/S Revanta Multistate Cghs Ltd vs Sunny Sapen on 30 May, 2025
Author: Navin Chawla
Bench: Navin Chawla
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Reserved on:03.03.2025
Pronounced on: 30.05.2025
+ RERA APPEAL 1/2024 & CM APPL. 2810/2024,
CMAPPL. 2812/2024
M/S REVANTA MULTISTATE CGHS LTD ....Appellant
Through: Mr.FanishK.Jain, Adv.
versus
SUNNY SAPEN ..... Respondent
Through: Mr.Asif Ali, Mohd.Aarif, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
JUDGMENT
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant, under Section 58
of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (in short,
‘RERA Act‘), challenging the Order dated 16.08.2023 (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘Impugned Order’) passed by the Real Estate
Appellate Tribunal, NCT of Delhi (in short, ‘Appellate Tribunal’) in
RERA Appeal No. 13/REAT/2021, whereby the appeal of the
appellant herein against the Order dated 22.01.2021 passed by the
Real Estate Regulatory Authority for the National Capital Territory of
Delhi (in short, ‘RERA Authority’) in Comp. No.64/2019, was
dismissed.
Brief Facts:-
2. The appellant herein is a Society registered under Section 7 of
the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 (in short, ‘Societies
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 1 of 30
20:40:26
Act’) vide Registration Certificate dated 02.06.2014, issued by the
office of the Central Registrar of Cooperative Societies, New Delhi.
3. It is the case of the appellant Society that it was formed with
the objective of providing affordable housing to its members, keeping
in view the Land Pooling Policy as per the Delhi Master Plan, 2021
(in short, ‘Master Plan’) notified by the Delhi Development Authority
(in short, ‘DDA’) on 05.09.2013. The role of the appellant Society was
to purchase the land from the contributions of its members and to
ensure a planned and well managed platform to facilitate land pooling
of land parcels at L-Zone, as per the guideline mentioned in the
Master Plan.
4. It is the case of the appellant Society that it had a target to
purchase 50 acres of land for the Society for surrendering the same to
DDA. Thereafter, DDA was to return 60% of the developed land to
the Society in terms of the Notification dated 05.09.2013, and the
housing project for the members of the Society was to be constructed
on the said developed land allotted to the Society. The members were
asked to give their respective choices regarding the flats so as to
determine their contribution towards the purchase cost of the land.
The contributions to be collected from the members were based on a
‘Construction Link Plan’.
5. It is the case of the appellant Society that, at its first stage, it
invited applications from the individuals for becoming member of the
appellant Society by submitting an application form, and by
depositing the membership fee of Rs.l,000/- and annual operation
charges of Rs.9,900/-. The respondent herein was also one such
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 2 of 30
20:40:26
applicant who had applied for the membership of the appellant
Society vide the membership form bearing no. SR70161 dated
28.05.2015, and deposited the requisite fee.
6. The respondent, while becoming a member, also submitted a
choice in respect of the category of flat vide the Housing Scheme
Application Form, wherein, the respondent opted for a 3BHK unit, for
which he was to contribute Rs. 1,350 per Sq. Ft. as the land cost.
7. It is the case of the appellant Society that DDA started
accepting the submission of the land parcels only on 05.02.2019.
8. The appellant Society started assembling the land for
surrendering it, and submitted the purchased land to DDA on
23.06.2019. However, the DDA failed to take further action as per the
Land Pooling Policy till the time 70% of the total land available in the
concerned Sector is not submitted to the DDA.
9. The appellant Society contends that since there is no land
allocated to the appellant Society by the DDA, and till now it has
merely collected the funds from its members for the purchase of the
land to surrender the same to the DDA, the appellant Society is not
subject to the provisions of the RERA Act.
10. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent that the
appellant Society has malafidely received various payments from the
respondent and other persons, by showing them as members of the
appellant Society, on the pretext of providing a well-furnished fully
constructed flat. The appellant Society made approximately 6000
members, including the respondent, and collected approximately
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 3 of 30
20:40:26
Rs.400 Crores from them, however, neither the respondent nor the
other members got any flat.
11. The respondent contends that the DDA, vide its letter dated
02.05.2019, addressed to one of the members of the appellant Society,
has clarified that it has not given any license or approval to any of the
developer/builder/society, including the appellant Society, under the
Land Pooling Scheme.
12. It is the case of the respondent that he has paid a total amount
of Rupees 13,27,500/- to the appellant by way of three cheques dated
30.05.2015, 01.06.2015, and 10.07.2015, out of the total cost of the
flat fixed as Rs.48,46,250/-, at the time of booking of the flat. At the
time of booking the Flat in May 2015, the respondent was assured that
the construction work relating to the project would start within the
next six months, that is, by December 2015.
13. It is contended by the respondent that in February 2019, the
appellant Society circulated minutes of its meeting held on
17.02.2017, asking the members to make a choice among the three
options, namely, reduction in the size of the dwelling unit, or payment
of additional land-cost of Rs.400 per sq. ft., or giving a written
consent authorizing the Society to dispose of the land and to distribute
the money received from the sale of land.
14. The respondent contends that there has been no progress in
commencement of work till date, nor was there any positive response
from the appellant Society to the repeated calls and e-mails by the
respondent.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 4 of 30
20:40:26
15. Being aggrieved of the above, the respondent filed a complaint
against the appellant Society before the learned RERA Authority,
being Complaint No.64/2019, titled Shri Sunny Sapen v. M/s.
Revanta Multistate Cooperative Group Housing Society Ltd.,
seeking a refund of Rs.13,27,500/- paid by him to the appellant
Society towards the booking and other costs relating to a 3 BHK flat
(admeasuring 1475 sq. ft.).
16. The appellant Society, inter alia, contended that it being a
Multi-State Cooperative Society, would not fall within the jurisdiction
of the RERA Act. The appellant Society further submitted that the
complaint of the respondent is liable to be rejected for not being in the
proper prescribed format under the RERA Act.
17. The learned RERA Authority, vide its Order dated 22.01.2021,
inter alia held that the appellant Society is covered within the
meaning of the term ‘Promoter’ as defined in Section 2(zk) of the
RERA Act. It held that the appellant Society, being in violation of
Section 12 of the RERA Act and also having admitted its liability, is
liable to refund to the respondent the entire amount of Rs.13,27,500/-
along with interest @9.30% per annum from the date of each
payment.
18. The appellant Society challenged the said Order of the learned
RERA Authority before the learned Appellate Tribunal vide the above
appeal.
19. The said appeal of the appellant Society has been dismissed by
the learned Appellate Tribunal vide the Impugned Order, inter alia,
holding that the appellant Society being an active player in the real
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 5 of 30
20:40:26
estate sector, having enrolled very large number of buyers as its
members, and being a ‘promoter’ within the definition of the said term
in Section 2(zk) of the RERA Act, was subject to the provision of the
RERA Act.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant:
20. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the RERA
Authority and the Appellate Tribunal have erred in holding that the
appellant Society, which is registered under the Societies Act, falls
under the ambit of the word ‘Promoter’ as defined in Section 2(zk) of
the RERA Act. He submits that the provisions of the RERA Act are
not applicable to the appellant Society.
21. He submits that for a Society to fall under the ambit of Section
2(zk) of the RERA Act, it must be an Apex State Level Cooperative
Housing Finance Society or a Primary Housing Society, and must
construct apartments or buildings for its members or for the allotees of
such apartments or buildings. He submits that neither of the two
ingredients are fulfilled by the appellant Society.
22. He submits that the appellant Society has not purchased any
land for development and construction of the apartments for sale,
rather the appellant Society has collected the land parcels for pooling
the same under the Land Pooling Scheme of the DDA. As the DDA is
yet to allot developed land to the appellant Society in exchange of the
land surrendered by the appellant Society to the DDA, the finding of
the learned Appellate Authority that the appellant Society has
purchased the land for development and construction of apartments,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 6 of 30
20:40:26
and that such activity makes the appellant Society amenable to the
RERA Act and for the prior Registration of the project, is erroneous.
23. He states that the stage for RERA registration, as shown in the
flow chart appended with Land Pooling Policy, is stage No. 17, and
the appellant Society has reached only at a stage 2 and 3, therefore,
the appellant Society, at this stage, cannot be governed by the RERA
Act.
24. He submits that the DDA has not even issued the
commencement certificate required for RERA Registration under
Section 4(2)(c) of the RERA Act, therefore, the requirement of RERA
Registration of the appellant Society, as stipulated by the Authority
and the Tribunal below, is completely misconceived.
25. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that even
otherwise, the Complaint was not maintainable before the Authority,
but was maintainable only before the Adjudicating Officer under
Section 71 of the RERA Act read with Rule 34 of the National Capital
Territory of Delhi Real Estate (Regulation and Development)
(General) Rules, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the RERA Rules’)
and the Form ‘N’ appended thereto.
Submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent:
26. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent
submits that the RERA Authority and the learned Appellate Tribunal
has rightly held that the appellant Society, being an active player in
the real estate sector and having enrolled very large number of buyers
as members, would be a ‘promoter’ within the definition of the said
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 7 of 30
20:40:26
term as provided in Section 2(zk) of the RERA Act, and therefore,
would fall within the ambit of the RERA Act.
27. He submits that the appellant Society has issued a Brochure, a
Plan, and a related payment schedule annexed thereto, to the
respondent, clearly stating that the Unit/flat booked by respondent will
have a built-up area of 1475 sq. ft., and has, in fact, even provided a
breakup of the cost of the flat. Therefore, the payment made by the so-
called members of the appellant Society is, in fact, for the purchase of
the flat, making the appellant Society subject to the provisions of the
RERA Act.
28. He submits that at the time of booking the apartment in May
2015, the respondent was given a false assurance and statements by
the appellant Society that the construction work relating to the project
would start within the next six months, that is, by December 2015,
however, the construction work has not started till date. Therefore, the
appellant Society has violated the provisions of Section 12 of the
RERA Act.
29. He submits that the learned RERA Authority and Appellate
Authority has rightly directed the appellant Society to refund the
entire amount paid by the respondent with interest according to the
Sections 18 and 31 of the RERA Act.
30. He submits that the jurisdiction of the RERA Authority was
rightly invoked by the respondent.
Analysis and findings:
31. We have considered the submissions made by the learned
counsels for the parties.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 8 of 30
20:40:26
32. From the above submissions of the learned counsels for the
parties, it would be apparent that this appeal is premised on the
following two objections of the appellant:
(a) The appellant is not a ‘promoter’ as defined in Section 2 (zk)
of the RERA Act and, therefore, the RERA Authority and, in
turn, the Appellate Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain
the complaint filed by the respondent; and,
(b) The RERA Authority had no jurisdiction to entertain the
complaint of the respondent under Rule 33 of the RERA
Rules, and the exclusive jurisdiction for the same, even
assuming the RERA Act to be applicable, vests only with the
Adjudicating Officer.
33. As far as the first of the above two objections is concerned, we
shall first consider the scheme of the RERA Act.
34. The RERA Act has been enacted for regulation and promotion
of the real estate sector, and to protect the interest of consumers in the
real estate sector. We reproduce the preamble of the Act as under:-
“An Act to establish the Real Estate
Regulatory Authority for regulation and
promotion of the real estate sector and to
ensure sale of plot, apartment or building, as
the case may be, or sale of real estate project,
in an efficient and transparent manner and to
protect the interest of consumers in the real
estate sector and to establish an adjudicating
mechanism for speedy dispute redressal and
also to establish the Appellate Tribunal to hear
appeals from the decisions, directions or
orders of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority
and the adjudicating officer and for matters
connected therewith or incidental thereto.”
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 9 of 30
20:40:26
35. Section 2 (zn) defines the term ‘real estate project’ as under:
“”real estate project” means the development
of a building or a building consisting of
apartments, or converting an existing building
or a part thereof into apartments, or the
development of land into plots or apartments,
as the case may be, for the purpose of selling
all or some of the said apartments or plots or
building, as the case may be, and includes the
common areas, the development works, all
improvements and structures thereon, and all
easement, rights and appurtenances belonging
thereto;”
36. A reading of the above definition would show that the
development of a building for purpose of selling apartments or plots
shall constitute as ‘real estate project’.
37. Section 2 (zk) of the RERA Act defines the term ‘promoter’ as
under:
“”promoter” means,–
(i) a person who constructs or causes to be
constructed an independent building or a
building consisting of apartments, or converts
an existing building or a part thereof into
apartments, for the purpose of selling all or
some of the apartments to other persons and
includes his assignees; or
(ii) a person who develops land into a project,
whether or not the person also constructs
structures on any of the plots, for the purpose
of selling to other persons all or some of the
plots in the said project, whether with or
without structures thereon; or
(iii) any development authority or any other public
body in respect of allottees of–
(a) buildings or apartments, as the case
may be, constructed by such authority or
body on lands owned by them or placed at
their disposal by the Government; or
(b) plots owned by such authority or body
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 10 of 30
20:40:26
or placed at their disposal by the
Government, for the purpose of selling all
or some of the apartments or plots; or
(iv) an apex State level co-operative housing
finance society and a primary co-operative
housing society which constructs apartments
or buildings for its Members or in respect of
the allottees of such apartments or
buildings;or
(v) any other person who acts himself as a builder,
coloniser, contractor, developer, estate
developer or by any other name or claims to
be acting as the holder of a power of attorney
from the owner of the land on which the
building or apartment is constructed or plot is
developed for sale; or
(vi) such other person who constructs any building
or apartment for sale to the general public.
Explanation.–For the purposes of this clause,
where the person who constructs or converts a
building into apartments or develops a plot for
sale and the person who sells apartments or
plots are different person, both of them shall
be deemed to be the promoters and shall be
jointly liable as such for the functions and
responsibilities specified under this Act or the
rules and regulations made thereunder;”
38. From the reading of the above Clause, it is clear that a primary
cooperative housing society would fall within the definition of the
term ‘promoter’.
39. In the present appeal, it is the case of the appellant that it is
merely a Society which was formed for collecting land and offering
the same to the DDA under the Land Pooling Policy, and on being
allotted the developed land by the DDA in return, it would construct
flats for its members. The learned counsel for the appellant has
vehemently submitted that as, at the present stage, the appellant has
merely pooled the land and given it to the DDA and is yet to receive
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 11 of 30
20:40:26
back the developed land, it cannot be termed as a ‘promoter’, as
defined in Section 2 (zk) of the RERA Act.
40. We are unable to accept the above submission of the learned
counsel for the appellant.
41. In the present case, we find that the alleged membership of the
appellant Society is only a facade created by the appellant Society to
hide behind its real identity of being a ‘real estate developer’.
Admittedly, the appellant Society issued a brochure calling upon
persons to invest in it as ‘clients’. We quote from the brochure as
under:
“Revanta is a vibrant realty society with a
vision of quality and on-time delivery. We turn
people’s dreams into reality. Within a short
span of time, we have experienced tremendous
growth, thanks to our workforce and the faith
of our clients. We are built on customer centric
approach and uncompromising business
values.
We are a well established Multi State CGHS
Society with a proven experience in delivering
incredible housing projects. Our upcoming
projects in the L-Zone of Delhi have been
envisioned to match the international
standards. We offer all types of apartments
catering to all income groups. Our mission is
to take care of all the members. The search for
a perfect dream home ends with us.
Our society is registered under Central
Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Government of India and our Registration
Certificate No: MSCS/CR/1049/2014.
Why to Invest
If you want to buy a spacious apartment with
top notch facilities, we offer you an investment
deal for a lifetime. The main focus of our
project is the satisfaction of our clients. With aSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 12 of 30
20:40:26
proven record and experience in this field of
real estate, we stand out from the rest.
We are completely dedicated to client
satisfaction. Our society has a provision of a
servant‟s quarter with an attached washroom
which is extremely hard to find in a Group
Housing Society.
Our main desire is to fulfil people‟s dream of
owning a house in Delhi by offering quality
housing at affordable prices in the capital city.
The prices offer better valuation than prices in
areas like Noida, Greater Noida, Kundli and
Bhiwadi which starts from Rs.3500-4500 per-
Sq Ft minimum) with a Delhi address and just
next to South Delhi, Airport and Dwarka
Subcity.”
42. Alongwith the brochure, the appellant Society also gave a
payment plan which also clearly shows that it was acting as a real
estate developer. We reproduce the payment plan offered by the
appellant Society as under:
Payment Plan
Plan-I (Rs.150/Sq. Ft. discount)
Size (Sq. Ft.) Land Cost Construction Car Total Cost Total
@ 1200 per Cost @ 1800 Parking of Cost
sq. ft. (in ₹) per sq. ft.(in₹) (in ₹) Apartment per sq.
(in ₹) ft. (in ₹)
975 11,70,000 17,55,000 2,00,000 31,25,000 3,2051,175 14,10,000 21,15,000 2,00,000 37,25,000 3,170
1,475 17,70,000 26,55,000 2,00,000 46,25,000 3,136
1,675 20,10,000 30,15,000 2,00,000 52,25,000 3,119
2,100 25,20,000 37,80,000 4,00,000 67,00,000 3,190
(2 CarSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 13 of 30
20:40:26
Parking
Mandatory)*In Plan- I Land Cost is to be paid within 45 days of becoming housing member.
Plan-II
Size (Sq. Ft.) Land Cost Construction Car Total Cost of Total
@ 1350 per Cost @ 1800 Parking Apartment Cost
sq. ft. (in ₹) per sq. ft. (in (in ₹) (in ₹) per sq.
₹) ft.(in ₹)
975 13,16,250 17,55,000 2,00,000 32,71,250 3,355
1,175 15,86,250 21,15,000 2,00,000 39,01,250 3,320
1,475 19,91,250 26,55,000 2,00,000 48,46,250 3,286
1,675 22,61,250 30,15,000 2,00,000 54,76,250 3,269
2,100 28,35,000 37,80,000 4,00,000 70,15,000 3,340
(2 Car
Parking
Mandatory)
*Construction cost and car parking charges are tentative and will be charged as
per construction linked payment plan.
*Any other charges levied by any competent authority will be charged
proportionately from members.”
43. We may also note that the appellant Society also offered
various amenities to the persons who would be investing in the flats,
which we reproduce hereinunder:
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 14 of 30
20:40:26
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 15 of 30
20:40:26
44. In view of the above, merely because, along with the
application form, the appellant Society also called upon the persons
investing in the flats to be constructed by them, to fill up a member
application form of the society, would not, in any manner, denude
them of the status of being a ‘promoter’ of a real estate project.
45. Similarly, only because the real estate project being developed
by them required the land to be collected, which shall be surrendered
to the DDA for further development, and the DDA would thereafter
allot developed land to the appellant Society depending upon its
entitlement under the Land Pooling Policy, would not again denude
the appellant of its status of being a ‘promoter’, as far as the
respondent is concerned. The charade of being a society cannot be
used by the appellant Society to escape its obligations and legal
requirements of being a promoter of a real estate project under the
RERA Act.
46. Even assuming that the stage of registration of the project
under the Land Pooling Policy has not come, however, that would also
not denude the appellant Society of its status as a promoter, having
collected money from the prospective buyers for the prospective flats
that it intends to develop once the land is allotted to it by the DDA. In
fact, the appellant Society has violated the terms of the RERA Act by
not only advertising the project, but also collecting money
thereagainst from unsuspecting consumers.
47. We may also note that Section 3 of the RERA Act contains a
prohibition on a promoter to advertise, market, book, sell or offer for
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 16 of 30
20:40:26
sale or invite persons to purchase, in any manner, any plot, apartment
or building in any real estate project or part of it, in any planning area,
without registering the real estate project with the RERA Authority.
We reproduce Section 3 of the RERA Act as under:
“Prior registration of real estate project with
Real Estate Regulatory Authority.–
(1)No promoter shall advertise, market, book,
sell or offer for sale, or invite persons to
purchase in any manner any plot, apartment
or building, as the case may be, in any real
estate project or part of it, in any planning
area, without registering the real estate project
with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority
established under this Act:
Provided that projects that are ongoing on the
date of commencement of this Act and for
which the completion certificate has not been
issued, the promoter shall make an application
to the Authority for registration of the said
project within a period of three months from
the date of commencement of this Act:
Provided further that if the Authority thinks
necessary, in the interest of allottees, for
projects which are developed beyond the
planning area but with the requisite
permission of the local authority, it may, by
order, direct the promoter of such project to
register with the Authority, and the provisions
of this Act or the rules and regulations made
thereunder, shall apply to such projects from
that stage of registration.
(2)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-
section (1), no registration of the real estate
project shall be required–
(a) where the area of land proposed to be
developed does not exceed five hundred square
meters or the number of apartments proposed
to be developed does not exceed eight
inclusive of all phases:
Provided that, if the appropriate Government
considers it necessary, it may, reduce the
threshold below five hundred square meters orSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 17 of 30
20:40:26
eight apartments, as the case may be, inclusive
of all phases, for exemption from registration
under this Act;
(b) where the promoter has received
completion certificate for a real estate project
prior to commencement of this Act;
(c) for the purpose of renovation or repair or
re-development which does not involve
marketing, advertising selling or new
allotment of any apartment, plot or building,
as the case may be, under the real estate
project.
Explanation.–For the purpose of this section,
where the real estate project is to be developed
in phases, every such phase shall be
considered a stand alone real estate project,
and the promoter shall obtain registration
under this Act for each phase separately.”
48. In the present case, as mentioned hereinabove, the appellant
Society has openly marketed its project and the amenities which it
proposes to offer to the buyers of the Flat, like the respondent herein,
through various brochures and advertisements. The appellant Society,
under the garb of being a Society, cannot flout the provisions of the
RERA Act and advertise the real estate project as a promoter, and then
contend that it is not subject to the provisions of the RERA Act merely
to avoid fulfilling its obligations towards the bona fide purchasers of
the Flats of the real estate project.
49. At this point, we may also note that the Societies Act has been
promulgated to regulate cooperative societies with objects not
confined to one State, and serving the interests of members in more
than one State, to facilitate the voluntary formation and democratic
functioning of the cooperatives as people’s institutions based on self-
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 18 of 30
20:40:26
help and mutual aid, and to enable them to promote their economic
and social betterment and to provide functional autonomy to them.
50. Under Section 5 of the Societies Act, only the following
societies can be registered as a Multi-State Co-operative Society:-
“5. Multi-State co-operative societies which
may be registered.–(1) No multi-State co-
operative society shall be registered under this
Act, unless,–
(a) its main objects are to serve the
interests of members in more than one state;
and
(b) its bye-laws provide for social and
economic betterment of its members through
self-help and mutual aid in accordance with
the co-operative principles.”
51. Chapter V of the Societies Act contains provisions for the
direction and management of Multi-State Cooperative Societies.
52. Chapter VII of the Societies Act provides for management of
the properties and funds of such Societies.
53. A reading of the above provisions would show that a Multi-
State Cooperative Society is constituted for the common aim to
promote the economic and social betterment of its members. It has a
democratic functioning and its funds cannot be utilised but in
accordance with the Societies Act.
54. In the present case, however, in the charade of being a Multi-
State Cooperative Society, the appellant is acting only as a promoter
qua its so-called members who are nothing but the customers booking
the flats in the project being developed or promised to be developed
by the appellant Society. In fact, the appellant Society, on our asking,
has placed certain documents to show that it is managing its affairs in
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 19 of 30
20:40:26
a democratic manner. These documents, however, do not further the
said submission of the appellant Society at all. Therefore, the
appellant Society cannot also take a shield behind the dispute
adjudication process provided under Section 84 of the Societies Act.
55. As far as the submission of the learned counsel for the
appellant Society that it was only the Adjudicating Authority which
had the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint filed by the respondent
is concerned, we, again, do not find any merit in the same.
56. Section 31 of the RERA Act provides that any aggrieved
person may file a complaint with the Authority or the Adjudicating
Officer, as the case may be, for any violation or contravention of the
provisions of the Act.
57. Rule 33 of the RERA Rules prescribes that any aggrieved
person may file such complaint before the RERA Authority in Form
‘N’. It also prescribes the procedure under which the Authority would
undertake for inquiring into the complaint. Rule 34 of the RERA
Rules states that an aggrieved person may file with the Adjudicating
Officer a complaint for interest and compensation as provided under
Sections 12, 14, 18, and 19 of the RERA Act, in format of the Form
‘N’ appended thereto. Sub-rule 2 of Rule 34 of the RERA Rules
prescribes the procedure to be followed by the Adjudicating Officer
for inquiring into such complaint. We quote Rules 33 and 34 of the
RERA Rules as under:
“33. Filing of complaint with the
Authority and inquiry by Authority.- (1) Any
aggrieved person may file a complaint with the
Authority for any violation under the Act or
the rules and regulations made thereunder,Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 20 of 30
20:40:26
save as those provided to be adjudicated by
the adjudicating officer, in Form „M‟, in
triplicate, until the application procedure is
made web based, which shall be accompanied
by a fees of one thousand rupees in the form of
a demand draft or a bankers cheque drawn on
a scheduled bank in favour of Authority and
payable at the branch of that bank at the
station where the seat of the said Authority is
situated or through online payment, as the
case may be.
(2)The Authority shall for the purposes of
deciding any complaint as specified under
sub-rule (1), follow summary procedure for
inquiry in the following manner, namely:-
(a)upon receipt of the complaint, the Authority
shall issue a notice along with particulars of
the alleged contravention and the relevant
documents to the respondent;
(b)the respondent against whom such notice is
issued under clause (a) of sub-rule (2), may
file his reply in respect of the complaint within
the period as specified in the notice;
(c) the notice may specify a date and time for
further hearing and the date and time for the
hearing shall also be communicated to the
complainant;
(d)on the date so fixed, the Authority shall
explain to the respondent about the
contravention alleged to have been committed
in relation to any of the provisions of the Act
or the rules and regulations made thereunder
and if the respondent,- (i) pleads guilty,
the Authority shall record the plea, and pass
such orders including imposition of penalty as
it thinks fit in accordance with the provisions
of the Act or the rules and regulations, made
thereunder;
(ii) does not plead guilty and contests the
complaint, the Authority shall demand an
explanation from the respondent;
(e) incase the Authority is satisfied on the basis
of the submissions made that the complaint
does not require any further inquiry it may
dismiss the complaint;
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 21 of 30
20:40:26
(f) in case the Authority is satisfied on the
basis of the submissions made that there is
need for further hearing into the complaint it
may order production of documents or other
evidence on a date and time fixed by it;
(g)the Authority shall have the power to carry
out an inquiry into the complaint on the basis
of documents and submissions;
(h)the Authority shall have the power to
summon and enforce the attendance of any
person acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case to give evidence or
to produce any documents which in the
opinion of the adjudicating officer, may be
useful for or relevant to the subject matter of
the inquiry, and in taking such evidence, the
Authority shall not be bound to observe the
provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
(11 of 1872);
(i) on the date so fixed, the Authority upon
consideration of the evidence produced before
it and other records and submissions is
satisfied that,-
(i) the respondent is in contravention of the
provisions of the Act or the rules and
regulations made thereunder, it shall pass such
orders including imposition of penalty as it
thinks fit in accordance with the provisions of
the Act or the rules and regulations made
thereunder;
(ii) the respondent is not in
contravention of the provisions of the Act or
the rules and regulations made thereunder, the
Authority may, by order in writing, dismiss the
complaint, with reasons to be recorded in
writing;
(j) if any person fails, neglects or refuses to
appear, or present himself as required before
the Authority, the Authority shall have the
power to proceed with the inquiry in the
absence of such person or persons after
recording the reasons for doing so.
(3)The procedure for day to day functioning of
the Authority, which have not been provided by
the Act or the rules made thereunder, shall beSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 22 of 30
20:40:26
as specified by regulations made by the
Authority.
(4)Where a party to the complaint is
represented by an authorised person, as
provided under section 56, a copy of the
authorisation to act as such and the written
consent thereto by such authorised person,
both in original, shall be appended to the
complaint or the reply to the notice of the
complaint, as the case may be.
34. Filing of complaint with the
adjudicating officer and inquiry by
adjudicating officer.- (1) Any aggrieved person
may file a complaint with the adjudicating
officer for interest and compensation as
provided under section 12, 14, 18 and 19 in
Form „N‟, in triplicate, until the application
procedure is made web based, which shall be
accompanied by a fees of one thousand rupees
in the form of a demand draft or a bankers
cheque drawn on a scheduled bank in favour
of the Authority and payable at the branch of
that bank at the station where the seat of the
said Authority is situated or through online
payment, as the case may be.
(2)The adjudicating officer shall for the
purposes of adjudging interest and
compensation follow summary procedure for
inquiry in the following manner, namely:-
(a)Upon receipt of the complaint, the
adjudicating officer shall issue a notice along
with particulars of the alleged contravention
and the relevant documents to the respondent;
(b)The respondent against whom such notice
is issued under clause (a) of sub-rule (2) may
file his reply in respect of the complaint within
the period as specified in the notice;
(c) The notice may specify a date and time for
further hearing and the date and time for the
hearing shall also be communicated to the
complainant;
(d)On the date so fixed, the adjudicating
officer shall explain to the respondent about
the contravention alleged to have been
committed in relation to any of the provisionsSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 23 of 30
20:40:26
of the Act or the rules and regulations made
thereunder and if the respondent,-
(i) pleads guilty, the adjudicating
officer shall record the plea, and by order in
writing, order payment of interest as specified
in rule 15 and such compensation as he thinks
fit, as the case may be, in accordance with the
provisions of the Act or the rules and
regulations, made thereunder;
(ii) does not plead guilty and contests
the complaint, the adjudicating officer shall
demand and explanation from the respondent;
(e) incase the adjudicating officer is satisfied
on the basis of the submissions made that the
complaint does not require any further inquiry
it may dismiss the complaint;
(f) in case the adjudicating officer is satisfied
on the basis of the submissions made that the
there is need for further hearing into the
complaint it may order production of
documents or other evidence on a date and
time fixed by him;
(g)the adjudicating officer shall have the
power to carry out an inquiry into the
complaint on the basis of documents and
submissions;
(h)the adjudicating officer shall have the
power to summon and enforce the attendance
of any person acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case to give evidence or
to produce any documents which in the
opinion of the adjudicating officer, may be
useful for or relevant to the subject matter of
the inquiry, and in taking such evidence, the
adjudicating officer shall not be bound to
observe the provisions of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872 (11 of 1872);
(i) on the date so fixed, the adjudicating officer
upon consideration of the evidence produced
before him and other records and submissions
is satisfied that the respondent is,-
(i) liable to pay interest and
compensation, as the case may be, the
adjudicating officer may, by order in writing,
order payment of interest as specified in ruleSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 24 of 30
20:40:26
15 and such compensation as he thinks fit, as
the case may be, in accordance with the
provisions of the Act or the rules and
regulations, made thereunder; or
(ii) not liable to any interest and
compensation, as the case may be, the
adjudicating officer may, by order in writing,
dismiss the complaint, with reasons to be
recorded in writing;
(j) if any person fails, neglects or refuses to
appear, or present himself as required before
the adjudicating officer, the adjudicating
officer shall have the power to proceed with
the inquiry in the absence of such person or
persons after recording the reasons for doing
so.
(3)The procedure for day to day functioning of
the adjudicating officer, which have not been
provided by the Act or the rules made
thereunder, shall be as specified by
regulations made by the Authority.
(4)Where a party to the complaint is
represented by an authorised person, as
provided under section 56, a copy of the
authorisation to act as such and the written
consent thereto by such authorised person,
both in original, shall be appended to the
complaint or the reply to the notice of the
complaint, as the case may be.”
58. Interpreting the pari materia Rules, the Supreme Court in
Newtech Promoters and Developers Private Limited. v. State of Uttar
Pradesh & Ors., (2021) 18 SCC 1, has held that a harmonious reading
of the above rules would show that when it comes to a complaint
seeking refund of the amount paid to the promoter and interest
thereon, or directing payment of interest for delayed delivery or
possession or penalty and interest thereto, it is the RERA Authority
which has the power to examine the complaint. On the other hand, the
Adjudicating Officer has the exclusive power to determine and
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 25 of 30
20:40:26
adjudicate on a complaint seeking compensation and interest thereon.
We quote from the Judgment as under:
“74. Learned counsel further submits
that in order to give full effect to the letter and
spirit of the right to refund in the context
explained above, there can be no doubt that
the determination of the right to refund must
be left to the authority whereas the
adjudication for adjudging compensation with
the adjudicating officer as reflected under
Section 71 of the Act. According to the learned
counsel, the authority is fully seized with the
standard agreements entered into between the
promoters and the allottees, and therefore, is
best equipped to determine the extent of delay,
if any. Therefore, refund claims can most
conveniently and effectively be dealt with by
the authority and interest on refund is
available at the rate prescribed by the
appropriate Government. In the instant batch
of matters, the prescribed rate of interest is
(MCLR + 1%), which has been notified by the
Government of Uttar Pradesh.
75. The legislature in its wisdom has
made a specific provision delineating power to
be exercised by the regulatory
authority/adjudicating officer. “Refund of the
amount” and “compensation” are two distinct
components which the allottee or the person
aggrieved is entitled to claim if the promoter
has not been able to hand over possession with
a nature of enquiry and mechanism provided
under the Act. So far as the claim with respect
to refund of amount on demand under Sections
18(1) and 19(4) of the Act is concerned, it
vests within the jurisdiction of the regulatory
authority. Section 71 carves out the
jurisdiction of the adjudicating officer to
adjudge compensation under Sections 12, 14,
18 and 19 after holding enquiry under Section
71(3) of the Act keeping in view the broad
contours referred to under Section 72 of the
Act.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 26 of 30
20:40:26
80. The further submission made by
learned counsel for the appellants that if the
allottee has defaulted the terms of the
agreement and still refund is claimed which
can be possible, to be determined by the
adjudicating officer. The submission appears
to be attractive but is not supported with
legislative intent for the reason that if the
allottee has made a default either in making
instalments or made any breach of the
agreement, the promoter has a right to cancel
the allotment in terms of Section 11(5) of the
Act and proviso to sub-section 5 of Section 11
enables the allottee to approach the regulatory
authority to question the termination or
cancellation of the agreement by the promotor
and thus, the interest of the promoter is
equally safeguarded.
81. The opening words of Section
71(1) of the Act make it clear that the scope
and functions of the adjudicating officer are
only for “adjudging compensation” under
Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 of the Act. If the
legislative intent was to expand the scope of
the powers of the adjudicating officer, then
the wording of Section 71(1) ought to have
been different. On the contrary, even the
opening words of Section 71(2) of the Act
make it clear that an application before the
adjudicating officer is only for “adjudging
compensation”. Even in Section 71(3) of the
Act, it is reiterated that the adjudicating
officer may direct “to pay such compensation
or interest” as the case may be as he thinks
fit, in accordance with provisions of Sections
12, 14, 18 and 19 of the Act. This has to be
seen together with the opening words of
Section 72 of the Act, which reads “while
adjudging the quantum of compensation or
interest, as the case may be, under Section
71, the adjudicating officer shall have due
regards” to the broad parameters to be kept
in mind while adjudging compensation to be
determined under Section 71 of the Act.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 27 of 30
20:40:26
82. The further submission made by
the learned counsel for the appellants that if
the authority and the adjudicating officer
either come to different conclusions on the
same questions or in a single complaint, the
person aggrieved is seeking manifold reliefs
with one of the relief of compensation and
payment of interest, with the timelines being
provided for the adjudicating officer to decide
the complaint under Section 71 of the Act. At
least, there is no provision which could be
referred to expedite the matter if filed before
the regulatory authority. The submission may
not hold good for the reason that there is a
complete delineation of the jurisdiction vested
with the regulatory authority and the
adjudicating officer. If there is any breach or
violation of the provisions of Sections 12, 14,
18 and 19 of the Act by the promoter, such a
complaint straightaway has to be filed before
the regulatory authority. What is being
referable to the adjudicating officer is for
adjudging compensation, as reflected under
Section 71 of the Act and accordingly rules
and regulations have been framed by the
authority for streamlining the complaints
which are made by the aggrieved person
either on account of violation of the
provisions of Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 or
for adjudging compensation and there
appears no question of any inconsistency
being made, in the given circumstances,
either by the regulatory authority or the
adjudicating officer.
83. So far as the single complaint is
filed seeking a combination of reliefs, it is
suffice to say, that after the rules have been
framed, the aggrieved person has to file
complaint in a separate format. If there is a
violation of the provisions of Sections 12, 14,
18 and 19, the person aggrieved has to file a
complaint as per form (M) or for
compensation under form (N) as referred to
under Rules 33(1) and 34(1) of the Rules. The
procedure for inquiry is different in both theSignature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 28 of 30
20:40:26
set of adjudication and as observed, there is
no room for any inconsistency and the power
of adjudication being delineated, still if
composite application is filed, can be
segregated at the appropriate stage.
84. So far as submission in respect of
the expeditious disposal of the application
before the adjudicating officer, as referred to
under sub-section (2) of Section 71 is
concerned, it pre-supposes that the
adjudicatory mechanism provided under
Section 71(3) of the Act has to be disposed of
within 60 days. It is expected by the regulatory
authority to dispose of the application
expeditiously and not to restrain the mandate
of 60 days as referred to under Section 71(3)
of the Act.
85. The provisions of which a
detailed reference has been made, if we go
with the literal rule of interpretation that
when the words of the statute are clear, plain
and unambiguous, the Courts are bound to
give effect to that meaning regardless of its
consequence. It leaves no manner of doubt
and it is always advisable to interpret the
legislative wisdom in the literary sense as
being intended by the legislature and the
Courts are not supposed to embark upon an
inquiry and find out a solution in substituting
the legislative wisdom which is always to be
avoided.”
(Emphasis Supplied)
59. In the present case, the respondent had filed his complaint
seeking the refund of the amount paid by him along with the interest.
The same was, therefore, correctly filed in Form ‘M’ and has been
rightly adjudicated by the RERA Authority. We, therefore, find no
merit in the objection raised by the appellant Society on this account.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 29 of 30
20:40:26
Conclusion:
60. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we find no merit in the
present appeal. The same is dismissed with costs quantified at
Rs.50,000/-, to be paid by the appellant Society to the respondent
within a period of four weeks from today. The pending applications
also stands disposed of.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
SHALINDER KAUR, J.
MAY 30, 2025/rv/VS
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
By:RENUKA NEGI
RERA APPEAL 1/2024
Signing Date:30.05.2025 Page 30 of 30
20:40:26