Full Judgment Text
- 1 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
RERA APPEAL NO. 85 OF 2025
C/W
RERA APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 87 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 89 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 90 OF 2025
IN RERA.A No. 85/2025
BETWEEN:
Digitally
signed by
KAVYA G
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 2013,
HAVING OFFICE AT, A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS,
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI - 400 028.
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
AND:
1. GOPAL AGARWAL
SON OF SUSHIL AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MR-506,
GOLDEN BLOSSOM,
OPPOSITE SAI BABA ASHRAM,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 067
2. AMIT AGARWAL
SON OF SUSHIL AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT MR-506, GOLDEN BLOSSOM,
OPPOSITE SAI BABA ASHRAM,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 067
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD,
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. REYNOLD D’SOUZA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF THE
REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT 2016,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL
ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL
NO.(K-REAT) NO.20/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A); REMAND
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 20/2025 TO THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU FOR
ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BY THE
HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
BENGALURU.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN RERA.A NO.86/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK
DATTATRAYA NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M. LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. HRISHIKESH MURUKKATHAMPOONDI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
2. PRABHA SUNDAR
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
BOTH RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2
RESIDE AT 2053, SOBHA
PALLADIAN, KARIAMMANA
AGRAHARA ROAD,
HAL CENTRAL TOWNSHIP,
OFF YAMLUR SIGNAL,
MARATHAHALLI
BENGALURU – 560 037
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE
RD
BLOCK, 3 CROSS ROAD,
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
CSI COMPOUND, MISSION ROAD
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P B APPAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR
C/R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT,
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) NO.22/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 22/2025 TO THE HON’BLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER.
IN RERA.A NO. 87/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1 PLOT-2, A BLOCK DATTATRAYA
NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
AND:
1. ANAND DHARIYA
SON OF MUKUND DHARIYA
AGED MAJOR
R/AT NO.43 SHIVAJI
HOUSING SOCIETY, INDU
NIWAS PUNE DISTRICT-411016
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 – SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) NO.24/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A).
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 24/2025 TO THE HONBLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU.
IN RERA.A NO. 88/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT, A-SHOP -12,
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI - 400028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED
REPRESENTATIVE, MR. RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JITESH LOHANI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT FLAT-4118, TOWER – 4,
PRESTIGE SHANTINIKETAN,
ITPL MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD
BENGALURU – 560 066
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, R/W SEC.1OO OF CPC, PRAYING TO (1) SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE
HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 21/25 (VIDE
ANNEXURE A); (2) REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 21/25
FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BY
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU.
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN RERA.A NO. 89/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS,
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED
REP. MR RAJU M LEGAL.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BAPPI BANIK
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT NO.5116, SOBHA CHRYSANTHEMUM,
THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 077.
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027.
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
F.R. NO.(K-REAT) NO.127/2024 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 127/2024 FOR
ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BEFORE
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL BENGALURU.
IN RERA.A NO. 90/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12
FLOOR - 1, PLOT - 2, A BLOCK
DATTATRAYA NIWAS
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEEPESH KHATRI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
D432 BRIGADE GOLDEN TRIANGLE
KATTAMAMNALLUR JUNCTION
BANGALORE
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 049
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
2. SHIVANI CHOPRA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
D432 BRIGADE GOLDEN TRIANGLE
KATTAMAMNALLUR JUNCTION
BANGALORE
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 049
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR SILVER JUBILEE
RD
BLOCK, 3 CROSS ROAD
CSI COMPOUND, MISSION ROAD,
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. REYNOLD D’SOUZA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO (1) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 23/25 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
(2) REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 23/25 TO THE HON’BLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
RERA.A No.85/2025 is filed against the order dated
28.10.2025 passed by the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate
1
Tribunal , Bengaluru in Appeal No.(K-REAT) 20/2025. By
means of the impugned order, the application – I.A No.II filed
by the promoter of 2025 seeking condonation of delay of 661
days in filing the memorandum of appeal against the judgment
and order dated 11.10.2022, Execution Order dated
27.12.2022 and the Revenue Recovery Certificate dated
24.01.2023 passed by the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory
2
Authority was rejected and in view thereof, the appeal was
disposed of.
2. In RERA A.No.86/2025, the order dated 28.10.2025
passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal
No.(K-REAT) 22/2025 is under challenge whereby, the
I.A No.II of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation of
delay of 1702 days in filing the memorandum of appeal against
the order dated 05.12.2019, Execution Order dated 04.03.2021
1
KREAT
2
KRERA
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
and the Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 23.03.2021 passed
by the KRERA was rejected and the Appeal No.22/2025 was
disposed of.
3. In RERA.A No.87/2025, the impugned order dated
28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal
No.(K-REAT) 24/2025 is under challenge whereby, the I.A No.II
of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of
486 days in filing the memorandum of appeal against the order
dated 26.06.2023, Execution Order dated 21.09.2023 and
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 25.10.2023 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and the Appeal No.24/2025 was
accordingly disposed of.
4. RERA.A No.88/2025 has been filed seeking to set
aside the impugned order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the
KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal No.(K-REAT) 21/2025 whereby,
the I.A No.II of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation
of delay of 1416 days in filing the appeal against the order
dated 16.09.2020, Execution Order dated 16.12.2022 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 30.12.2022 passed by the
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
KRERA was rejected and the Appeal No.21/2025 was disposed
of.
5. RERA. A No.89/2025 is filed against the impugned
order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in
F.R. No.(K-REAT) 127/2024 whereby, the I.A No.II of 2025
filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of 2012
days in filing the appeal against the impugned order dated
29.01.2019, Execution Order dated 06.12.2022 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 16.12.2022 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and the Appeal F.R. No.127/2024 was
disposed of.
6. In RERA.A No.90/2025 is filed seeking to set aside
the order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bangalore,
Appeal No.(K-REAT)23/2025 whereby, the I.A No.II of 2025,
filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of 486 days
in filing the memorandom of appeal against the order dated
02.08.2023, Execution Order dated 05.03.2024 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 04.04.2024 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and Appeal No.23/2025 has been
disposed of.
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
7. Different grievances were raised by the allottees /
complainants before the KRERA in complaints filed under
Section 31 of the RERA Act pertaining to non-handing over of
possession of the apartment, delayed compensation not being
paid etc. The issues being raised by the complainants before
the RERA Authority being the same, the aforesaid appeals were
filed before the Appellate Tribunal challenging the aforesaid
orders passed by the RERA Authority seeking condonation of
delay.
8. In the applications filed by the appellant / promoter
seeking condonation of the delay, reference was made to the
affidavit enclosed thereto to demonstrate that sufficient cause
existed for not filing the appeals within time. The affidavits are
identically worded, except the factum of the dates of the
judgment/order passed by the Authority. Since the content and
tenure of the affidavits are the same in all, the affidavit filed in
RERA.A No.85/2025 is quoted below wherein, the reasons have
been stated for condonation of delay. It reads as follows:
“I, Raju M s/o. Mani Achari, aged about 44 years,
having office at No.17, Bhattarahalli, K.R. Puram,
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
Bengaluru - 560 049, do hereby solemnly affirm
and swear on oath as follows:
1. I am the authorized representative of the
Appellant in the instant matter. I am aware
of the facts and circumstances in the instant
matter based on records maintained by the
Appellants. I am competent to swear to the
accompanying affidavit.
2. I submit that the Appellant has filed the
instant appeal being aggrieved by the
common Order dated 11.10.2022
("Impugned Judgment') Execution Order
dated 27.12.2022 and Revenue Recovery
Certificate (RRC) dated 24.01.2023 passed
by the Hon'ble Karnataka Real Estate
Regulatory Authority ("RERA") in
CMP/200826/0006434.
3. I state that the Impugned Judgment was
passed on 11.10.2022, however, the same
came to the knowledge of the Appellant only
on 20.10.2022, through email. I state that
thereafter, the Appellant immediately started
to procure all necessary information and
collate documents for the purposes of filing
the Appeal. However, the same required
some time as several officers present in the
Appellant company at the time of passing of
the Impugned Judgment had left the office of
the Appellant company and as such, the
officers who joined thereafter, were unable
to procure all necessary information and
collate documents easily.
4. Further, and due to office functioning
remotely during Covid-19 period, not all
records were physically available at the
offices of the Appellant when the offices of
the Appellant resumed functioning
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
physically. This coupled with the fact that the
several officers had left the Appellant
company, the Appellant was unable to
procure all necessary information and collate
documents to prefer the instant Appeal
within the prescribed period of time.
5. Further, it is also to be noted that there was
no quorum before this Hon'ble Tribunal,
being the Appellate Tribunal to the
Respondent No.2, from 20.10.2022 to
September 2024. As such, the Appellant has
preferred the instant Appeal now before this
Hon'ble Tribunal. Therefore, I state that for
reasons outside the control of the Appellant
Company the Appellant was unable to
challenge the Impugned Orders within the
prescribed period of time. Hence, this
Application.
6. I state that any delay in filing the appeal is
neither intentional nor deliberate, but for the
bonafide reasons as mentioned above. If the
accompanying application is not allowed the
Appellant will be put to great hardship,
irreparable loss and the very purpose and
object of filing this Appeal would be
defeated. On the other hand, no hardship
would be caused to the Respondents if the
application is allowed as the matter would be
heard on the merits of the case.
Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that
this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone
the delay in filing the instant appeal as prayed
for in the accompanying application, in the
interest of justice and equity.”
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
9. It has been stated that the promoter went about
procuring all necessary information and collating documents for
the purpose of filing appeal. Since several Officers of the
appellant / promoter had left the office of the appellant, and
Officers had joined thereafter, the appellant was unable to
procure all necessary information and collate documents easily.
Due to remote functioning of office during COVID-19 period,
not all records were physically available at the offices of the
appellant when the appellant resumed functioning of the offices
physically. It has also been stated that the requisite forum
before the Tribunal was not available from 20.10.2022 till
September, 2024. It was only thereafter that the appeal was
preferred. It was finally stated that the delay in filing the
appeal is bona fide and if the application is not allowed, the
appellant would be put to great hardship and irreparable loss.
10. We find from perusal of the aforesaid affidavit that
no reasons have been stated which would constitute sufficient
cause for condonation of the enormous delay ranging from 486
days to 2012 days in filing the aforesaid appeals. Though
learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
that the merits of the matter also need to be looked into, as the
appellant has a very strong case on merits, the fact remains
that in various decisions of the Supreme Court, it has been held
that merits are not required to be looked into while adjudicating
an application for condonation of delay. We note from the
orders impugned passed by the Appellate Tribunal that while
rejecting the appeals filed by the appellant / promoter, cogent
reasons have been ascribed.
11. An application for condonation of delay made under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act construed liberally provided in
“sufficient cause" for not filing the appeal/application within the
prescribed period is shown to the satisfaction of the Court (See
Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by LRs and others vs. Special
Deputy Collector (LA) - [(2024) 12 SCC 336)] and Shivamma
(Dead) by Lrs. vs. Karnataka Housing Board and others –
[(2025) SCC Online SC 1969].
12. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no merit in the
aforesaid appeals. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. Any
amount that has been deposited by the appellant before the
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
Appellate Tribunal towards pre-deposit, shall be refunded to the
appellant on application.
Pending I.As stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
KG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
TH
DATED THIS THE 26 DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2026
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
RERA APPEAL NO. 85 OF 2025
C/W
RERA APPEAL NO. 86 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 87 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 88 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 89 OF 2025
RERA APPEAL NO. 90 OF 2025
IN RERA.A No. 85/2025
BETWEEN:
Digitally
signed by
KAVYA G
Location:
High Court
of Karnataka
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.,
A COMPANY UNDER THE
COMPANIES ACT, 2013,
HAVING OFFICE AT, A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS,
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI - 400 028.
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
- 2 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
AND:
1. GOPAL AGARWAL
SON OF SUSHIL AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
RESIDING AT MR-506,
GOLDEN BLOSSOM,
OPPOSITE SAI BABA ASHRAM,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 067
2. AMIT AGARWAL
SON OF SUSHIL AGARWAL,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
R/AT MR-506, GOLDEN BLOSSOM,
OPPOSITE SAI BABA ASHRAM,
KADUGODI, BENGALURU - 560 067
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD,
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. REYNOLD D’SOUZA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF THE
REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT 2016,
PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED
28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL
ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN APPEAL
NO.(K-REAT) NO.20/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A); REMAND
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 20/2025 TO THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU FOR
ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BY THE
HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
BENGALURU.
- 3 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN RERA.A NO.86/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK
DATTATRAYA NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M. LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. HRISHIKESH MURUKKATHAMPOONDI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
2. PRABHA SUNDAR
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
BOTH RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2
RESIDE AT 2053, SOBHA
PALLADIAN, KARIAMMANA
AGRAHARA ROAD,
HAL CENTRAL TOWNSHIP,
OFF YAMLUR SIGNAL,
MARATHAHALLI
BENGALURU – 560 037
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE
RD
BLOCK, 3 CROSS ROAD,
- 4 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
CSI COMPOUND, MISSION ROAD
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. P B APPAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR
C/R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT,
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) NO.22/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 22/2025 TO THE HON’BLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER.
IN RERA.A NO. 87/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1 PLOT-2, A BLOCK DATTATRAYA
NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR. RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
- 5 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
AND:
1. ANAND DHARIYA
SON OF MUKUND DHARIYA
AGED MAJOR
R/AT NO.43 SHIVAJI
HOUSING SOCIETY, INDU
NIWAS PUNE DISTRICT-411016
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(R1 – SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) NO.24/2025 (VIDE ANNEXURE A).
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 24/2025 TO THE HONBLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER BY THE HONBLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENGALURU.
IN RERA.A NO. 88/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER
THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT, A-SHOP -12,
- 6 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS, GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH),
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI - 400028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED
REPRESENTATIVE, MR. RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. JITESH LOHANI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN,
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS,
R/AT FLAT-4118, TOWER – 4,
PRESTIGE SHANTINIKETAN,
ITPL MAIN ROAD, WHITEFIELD
BENGALURU – 560 066
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY,
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SHIVA KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, R/W SEC.1OO OF CPC, PRAYING TO (1) SET ASIDE
THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE
HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU IN APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 21/25 (VIDE
ANNEXURE A); (2) REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 21/25
FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BY
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU.
- 7 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
IN RERA.A NO. 89/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12,
FLOOR-1, PLOT-2, A BLOCK,
DATTATRAYA NIWAS,
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED
REP. MR RAJU M LEGAL.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. BAPPI BANIK
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT NO.5116, SOBHA CHRYSANTHEMUM,
THANISANDRA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 077.
2. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR, SILVER JUBILEE BLOCK,
RD
3 CROSS ROAD, CSI COMPOUND,
MISSION ROAD, SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA,
BENGALURU - 560 027.
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SHIVAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
- 8 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
F.R. NO.(K-REAT) NO.127/2024 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 127/2024 FOR
ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE MATTER BEFORE
THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL BENGALURU.
IN RERA.A NO. 90/2025
BETWEEN:
LILY REALTY PVT. LTD.
A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013
HAVING OFFICE AT A-SHOP-12
FLOOR - 1, PLOT - 2, A BLOCK
DATTATRAYA NIWAS
GOKHALE ROAD (SOUTH)
PORTUGUESE CHURCH, DADAR (W)
MUMBAI – 400 028
REP. BY ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE
MR RAJU M., LEGAL
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. VIKRAM A. HUILGOL, SENIOR COUNSEL
FOR SRI. SHRIKARA P K., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. DEEPESH KHATRI
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
D432 BRIGADE GOLDEN TRIANGLE
KATTAMAMNALLUR JUNCTION
BANGALORE
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 049
- 9 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
2. SHIVANI CHOPRA
FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN
AGED MAJOR
D432 BRIGADE GOLDEN TRIANGLE
KATTAMAMNALLUR JUNCTION
BANGALORE
BENGALURU URBAN
KARNATAKA – 560 049
3. KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY
ND
2 FLOOR SILVER JUBILEE
RD
BLOCK, 3 CROSS ROAD
CSI COMPOUND, MISSION ROAD,
SAMPANGI RAMA NAGARA
BENGALURU – 560 027
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. REYNOLD D’SOUZA, ADVOCATE FOR R1 AND R2;
SRI. K V GIRISH, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
THIS RERA.APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 58 OF
THE REAL ESTATE (REGULATION AND DEVELOPMENT) ACT
2016, PRAYING TO (1) SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER
DATED 28.10.2025 PASSED BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA
REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU IN
APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 23/25 (VIDE ANNEXURE A);
(2) REMAND APPEAL NO.(K-REAT) 23/25 TO THE HON’BLE
KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
BENGALURU FOR ADJUDICATION ON THE MERITS OF THE
MATTER BY THE HON’BLE KARNATAKA REAL ESTATE
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI
and
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF
- 10 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAYANT BANERJI)
RERA.A No.85/2025 is filed against the order dated
28.10.2025 passed by the Karnataka Real Estate Appellate
1
Tribunal , Bengaluru in Appeal No.(K-REAT) 20/2025. By
means of the impugned order, the application – I.A No.II filed
by the promoter of 2025 seeking condonation of delay of 661
days in filing the memorandum of appeal against the judgment
and order dated 11.10.2022, Execution Order dated
27.12.2022 and the Revenue Recovery Certificate dated
24.01.2023 passed by the Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory
2
Authority was rejected and in view thereof, the appeal was
disposed of.
2. In RERA A.No.86/2025, the order dated 28.10.2025
passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal
No.(K-REAT) 22/2025 is under challenge whereby, the
I.A No.II of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation of
delay of 1702 days in filing the memorandum of appeal against
the order dated 05.12.2019, Execution Order dated 04.03.2021
1
KREAT
2
KRERA
- 11 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
and the Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 23.03.2021 passed
by the KRERA was rejected and the Appeal No.22/2025 was
disposed of.
3. In RERA.A No.87/2025, the impugned order dated
28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal
No.(K-REAT) 24/2025 is under challenge whereby, the I.A No.II
of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of
486 days in filing the memorandum of appeal against the order
dated 26.06.2023, Execution Order dated 21.09.2023 and
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 25.10.2023 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and the Appeal No.24/2025 was
accordingly disposed of.
4. RERA.A No.88/2025 has been filed seeking to set
aside the impugned order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the
KREAT, Bengaluru in Appeal No.(K-REAT) 21/2025 whereby,
the I.A No.II of 2025 filed by the promoter seeking condonation
of delay of 1416 days in filing the appeal against the order
dated 16.09.2020, Execution Order dated 16.12.2022 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 30.12.2022 passed by the
- 12 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
KRERA was rejected and the Appeal No.21/2025 was disposed
of.
5. RERA. A No.89/2025 is filed against the impugned
order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bengaluru in
F.R. No.(K-REAT) 127/2024 whereby, the I.A No.II of 2025
filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of 2012
days in filing the appeal against the impugned order dated
29.01.2019, Execution Order dated 06.12.2022 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 16.12.2022 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and the Appeal F.R. No.127/2024 was
disposed of.
6. In RERA.A No.90/2025 is filed seeking to set aside
the order dated 28.10.2025 passed by the KREAT, Bangalore,
Appeal No.(K-REAT)23/2025 whereby, the I.A No.II of 2025,
filed by the promoter seeking condonation of delay of 486 days
in filing the memorandom of appeal against the order dated
02.08.2023, Execution Order dated 05.03.2024 and the
Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 04.04.2024 passed by the
KRERA has been rejected and Appeal No.23/2025 has been
disposed of.
- 13 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
7. Different grievances were raised by the allottees /
complainants before the KRERA in complaints filed under
Section 31 of the RERA Act pertaining to non-handing over of
possession of the apartment, delayed compensation not being
paid etc. The issues being raised by the complainants before
the RERA Authority being the same, the aforesaid appeals were
filed before the Appellate Tribunal challenging the aforesaid
orders passed by the RERA Authority seeking condonation of
delay.
8. In the applications filed by the appellant / promoter
seeking condonation of the delay, reference was made to the
affidavit enclosed thereto to demonstrate that sufficient cause
existed for not filing the appeals within time. The affidavits are
identically worded, except the factum of the dates of the
judgment/order passed by the Authority. Since the content and
tenure of the affidavits are the same in all, the affidavit filed in
RERA.A No.85/2025 is quoted below wherein, the reasons have
been stated for condonation of delay. It reads as follows:
“I, Raju M s/o. Mani Achari, aged about 44 years,
having office at No.17, Bhattarahalli, K.R. Puram,
- 14 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
Bengaluru - 560 049, do hereby solemnly affirm
and swear on oath as follows:
1. I am the authorized representative of the
Appellant in the instant matter. I am aware
of the facts and circumstances in the instant
matter based on records maintained by the
Appellants. I am competent to swear to the
accompanying affidavit.
2. I submit that the Appellant has filed the
instant appeal being aggrieved by the
common Order dated 11.10.2022
("Impugned Judgment') Execution Order
dated 27.12.2022 and Revenue Recovery
Certificate (RRC) dated 24.01.2023 passed
by the Hon'ble Karnataka Real Estate
Regulatory Authority ("RERA") in
CMP/200826/0006434.
3. I state that the Impugned Judgment was
passed on 11.10.2022, however, the same
came to the knowledge of the Appellant only
on 20.10.2022, through email. I state that
thereafter, the Appellant immediately started
to procure all necessary information and
collate documents for the purposes of filing
the Appeal. However, the same required
some time as several officers present in the
Appellant company at the time of passing of
the Impugned Judgment had left the office of
the Appellant company and as such, the
officers who joined thereafter, were unable
to procure all necessary information and
collate documents easily.
4. Further, and due to office functioning
remotely during Covid-19 period, not all
records were physically available at the
offices of the Appellant when the offices of
the Appellant resumed functioning
- 15 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
physically. This coupled with the fact that the
several officers had left the Appellant
company, the Appellant was unable to
procure all necessary information and collate
documents to prefer the instant Appeal
within the prescribed period of time.
5. Further, it is also to be noted that there was
no quorum before this Hon'ble Tribunal,
being the Appellate Tribunal to the
Respondent No.2, from 20.10.2022 to
September 2024. As such, the Appellant has
preferred the instant Appeal now before this
Hon'ble Tribunal. Therefore, I state that for
reasons outside the control of the Appellant
Company the Appellant was unable to
challenge the Impugned Orders within the
prescribed period of time. Hence, this
Application.
6. I state that any delay in filing the appeal is
neither intentional nor deliberate, but for the
bonafide reasons as mentioned above. If the
accompanying application is not allowed the
Appellant will be put to great hardship,
irreparable loss and the very purpose and
object of filing this Appeal would be
defeated. On the other hand, no hardship
would be caused to the Respondents if the
application is allowed as the matter would be
heard on the merits of the case.
Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that
this Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone
the delay in filing the instant appeal as prayed
for in the accompanying application, in the
interest of justice and equity.”
- 16 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
9. It has been stated that the promoter went about
procuring all necessary information and collating documents for
the purpose of filing appeal. Since several Officers of the
appellant / promoter had left the office of the appellant, and
Officers had joined thereafter, the appellant was unable to
procure all necessary information and collate documents easily.
Due to remote functioning of office during COVID-19 period,
not all records were physically available at the offices of the
appellant when the appellant resumed functioning of the offices
physically. It has also been stated that the requisite forum
before the Tribunal was not available from 20.10.2022 till
September, 2024. It was only thereafter that the appeal was
preferred. It was finally stated that the delay in filing the
appeal is bona fide and if the application is not allowed, the
appellant would be put to great hardship and irreparable loss.
10. We find from perusal of the aforesaid affidavit that
no reasons have been stated which would constitute sufficient
cause for condonation of the enormous delay ranging from 486
days to 2012 days in filing the aforesaid appeals. Though
learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently contended
- 17 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
that the merits of the matter also need to be looked into, as the
appellant has a very strong case on merits, the fact remains
that in various decisions of the Supreme Court, it has been held
that merits are not required to be looked into while adjudicating
an application for condonation of delay. We note from the
orders impugned passed by the Appellate Tribunal that while
rejecting the appeals filed by the appellant / promoter, cogent
reasons have been ascribed.
11. An application for condonation of delay made under
Section 5 of the Limitation Act construed liberally provided in
“sufficient cause" for not filing the appeal/application within the
prescribed period is shown to the satisfaction of the Court (See
Pathapati Subba Reddy (died) by LRs and others vs. Special
Deputy Collector (LA) - [(2024) 12 SCC 336)] and Shivamma
(Dead) by Lrs. vs. Karnataka Housing Board and others –
[(2025) SCC Online SC 1969].
12. For the reasons aforesaid, we find no merit in the
aforesaid appeals. The appeals are accordingly dismissed. Any
amount that has been deposited by the appellant before the
- 18 -
NC: 2026:KHC:12012-DB
RERA.A No. 85 of 2025
C/W RERA.A No. 86 of 2025
RERA.A No. 87 of 2025
HC-KAR
AND 3 OTHERS
Appellate Tribunal towards pre-deposit, shall be refunded to the
appellant on application.
Pending I.As stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(JAYANT BANERJI)
JUDGE
Sd/-
(T.M.NADAF)
JUDGE
KG
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 1