AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Sh. Rahul Mittal, Complainant present in person.
Adv. Rohit Mahawar appeared on behalf of the Respondents and submitted that Vakalatnama has been filed.
Authority notes that notice sent through email is seen returned with comments “left without address”.
The subject project is registered with the Authority. The Promoter, therefore, is under an obligation to inform the Authority if there is any change in their correspondence or registered address. We are of view that in this case the Promoter has failed to do so. This default on the part of Promoter is in violation of the guidelines issued by the Authority.
Ld. Counsel for Respondents is directed to inform the address of correspondence and registered address of the Promoter to the Authority within 24 hours. The Promoter shall also explain whether they have changed their address and if so why the Authority was not informed accordingly.
Ld. Counsel for Respondents also informed that he has not received copy of complaint.
Ld. Counsel for Complainant is directed to supply copy of complaint along with all documents to Ld. Counsel for Respondents today itself.
Respondent is directed to file reply by 30.05.2025 with copy served on the Complainant.
Complainant may file rejoinder, if any, by 20.06.2025 with copy served on the Respondents.
Respondents is also directed to explain under which circumstances they raised the demand of more than 10% of the cost of unit before registering the Agreement for Sale in the instant case in contravention of Section 13 of the RE(RD) Act, 2016.
List the case on 08.07.2025 at 2:30 pm.