Appellant / Complainant
Ratnakar Gedam
Respondent
Devika Gold Homz Pvt. Ltd.
devika gold homz pvt. ltd.
₹15,32,706
Appellant
Legal Issues & Claims Raised
Case Procedural History & Progression Tree
Visual step-by-step tree detailing dispute origin, interim hearings, and final tribunal ruling.
Complaint Filing & Dispute Registration
Complaint registered under Case ID 0901126044222023 by Ratnakar Gedam against Devika Gold Homz Pvt. Ltd. before up_rera.
for delivery of Judgment/Order
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the cancellation of three allotted units and the Regulatory Authority's order, while directing the respondent promoter to refund the deposited amounts with interest (MCLR+1%) and litigation costs.
Hearing
The Tribunal noted the High Court's conditional stay on a previously imposed cost of Rs. 50,000/- and proceeded to hear arguments on the merits of the appeal, subsequently reserving judgment.
Hearing
The Tribunal has granted a request by the respondent's counsel to list the appeal for orders or hearing on 30.07.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall a previous order imposing a cost of Rs. 50,000, noting that repeated adjournments were being used to harass the appellant. The respondent agreed to pay the cost within 10 days, failing which the appeal will proceed ex parte.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted the respondent additional time to file a rejoinder to the appellant's objections regarding a recall application and scheduled the matter for hearing on 07.05.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal has scheduled the appeal for hearing on 15.04.2025 to consider a recall application filed by the respondent and directed the appellant to file objections to said application.
Hearing
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the respondent for non-cooperation and repeated requests for adjournment, warning that the case will proceed ex parte if they fail to appear at the next hearing.
Hearing
The Tribunal has scheduled the case for orders or final hearing on March 17, 2025.
Hearing
Upon the joint request of the counsels for both parties, the Tribunal has adjourned the hearing of the appeal to 12.02.2025.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted a request from the respondent's counsel to list the appeal for hearing on 24.01.2025, noting that no further adjournments will be permitted.
Hearing
The Tribunal has adjourned the appeal to 19.12.2024 following a request from the respondent's counsel.
Hearing
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent but imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the respondent to the appellant.
Admission
The Tribunal granted a final opportunity to the respondent to argue the matter on the next date and scheduled the appeal for a final hearing on 17.10.2024, stipulating that no further adjournments will be permitted.
Admission
The Tribunal noted that the appellant has filed a rejoinder to the respondent's objections and, upon joint request from both parties, adjourned the matter for final hearing on 20.09.2024.
Admission
The Tribunal granted the appellant three days to file a rejoinder to the respondent's objections and scheduled the next hearing for August 20, 2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal granted the appellant 10 days to file a reply to the respondent's objections and scheduled the next hearing for May 20, 2024.
Delay condonation
The Tribunal deprecated the respondent's counsel's conduct regarding an adjournment request and granted a final one-week extension for the respondent to file objections and vakalatnama.
Admission
The Tribunal granted the respondent 10 days to file objections and directed them to provide a soft copy of said objections to the applicant's counsel, with the matter listed for hearing on 14.03.2024.
Admission
The Tribunal issued notice to the respondent and outlined the procedural requirements for service of notice and the exchange of objections and replies before the next hearing on 09.11.2023.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-30-07-2025
The Tribunal noted the High Court's conditional stay on a previously imposed cost of Rs. 50,000/- and proceeded to hear arguments on the merits of the appeal, subsequently reserving judgment.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-17-10-2024
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent but imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the respondent to the appellant.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-17-10-2025
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the cancellation of three allotted units and the Regulatory Authority's order, while directing the respondent promoter to refund the deposited amounts with interest (MCLR+1%) and litigation costs.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-22-05-2025
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall a previous order imposing a cost of Rs. 50,000, noting that repeated adjournments were being used to harass the appellant. The respondent agreed to pay the cost within 10 days, failing which the appeal will proceed ex parte.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-17-03-2025
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the respondent for non-cooperation and repeated requests for adjournment, warning that the case will proceed ex parte if they fail to appear at the next hearing.
Tribunal Order #0901126044222023-14-03-2024
The Tribunal deprecated the respondent's counsel's conduct regarding an adjournment request and granted a final one-week extension for the respondent to file objections and vakalatnama.
Tribunal Disposal & Final Award Ruling
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the cancellation of three allotted units and the Regulatory Authority's order, while directing the respondent promoter to refund the deposited amounts with interest (MCLR+1%) and litigation costs. Awarded in favor of Appellant. Awarded interest rate: MCLR + 1%.
Final Tribunal Order & Ruling Verdict Summary
Official Ruling Summary
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the cancellation of three allotted units and the Regulatory Authority's order, while directing the respondent promoter to refund the deposited amounts with interest (MCLR+1%) and litigation costs.
Ruling Awarded To
Appellant
Awarded Interest Rate
MCLR + 1%
Interest Period
from the date of deposit till the date of actual payment
Statutory Sections Cited (RERA Act 2016)
Appearing Legal Counsel & Advocates
Appellant Advocate(s)
- A
- Samrat Vaish
Respondent Advocate(s)
- Siddharth Nandwani
- Abhishek Khare
- Aahuti Agarwal
- Pranjal Mishra
Official RERA Tribunal Orders (6)
The Tribunal noted the High Court's conditional stay on a previously imposed cost of Rs. 50,000/- and proceeded to hear arguments on the merits of the appeal, subsequently reserving judgment.
The Tribunal granted an adjournment requested by the respondent but imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the respondent to the appellant.
The U.P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeals, setting aside the cancellation of three allotted units and the Regulatory Authority's order, while directing the respondent promoter to refund the deposited amounts with interest (MCLR+1%) and litigation costs.
The Tribunal rejected the respondent's application to recall a previous order imposing a cost of Rs. 50,000, noting that repeated adjournments were being used to harass the appellant. The respondent agreed to pay the cost within 10 days, failing which the appeal will proceed ex parte.
The Tribunal imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the respondent for non-cooperation and repeated requests for adjournment, warning that the case will proceed ex parte if they fail to appear at the next hearing.
The Tribunal deprecated the respondent's counsel's conduct regarding an adjournment request and granted a final one-week extension for the respondent to file objections and vakalatnama.
Need to research all rulings for devika gold homz pvt. ltd.?
Extract builder dossiers, check execution status, and draft RERA appeal petitions in minutes using TathyaGrid.