Punjab-Haryana High Court
Romi Tyagi And Anothers vs M/S Bptp Ltd on 20 March, 2026
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
RERA-APPL No.31-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
116
RERA Appeal No.31-2026 (O&M)
Date of decision: March 20th, 2026
Romi Tyagi and another
.....Appellants
Versus
M/s BPTP Ltd.
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Vikas Sethi and Mr. Chitresh Mittal, Advocates
for the appellants.
Mr. Hemant Saini, Advocate
for respondent.
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
CM-3828-C-2026 Prayer in this application is for condonation of delay of 35 days in filing the appeal.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed.
Delay of 35 days in filing the appeal stands condoned. Main case
1. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that in the present case, vide order 23.02.2022, the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Panchkula, had disposed of the complaint filed by the appellants and the appeal against the said order was filed by the respondent after a delay of almost three years. It is submitted that in the said case, notice has been issued in the application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal and the matter is now listed for 25.04.2026. It is further submitted that since PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.03.20 16:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh RERA-APPL No.31-2026 (O&M) 2 there was no interim order in favour of the respondent, the Executing Court had proceeded further and had passed the order dated 16.10.2025 ordering the arrest of the directors of the respondent-company. It is submitted that against the said order, appeal No.1273 of 2025 has been filed in which the operation of the said order has been stayed and the said appeal is listed for 25.04.2026 and both the appeals are listed for arguments. It is submitted that the original order in the complaint was passed in the year 2022 and it is further submitted that the present appellants as well as the counsel would be ready to argue both the appeals on the next date of hearing and the Appellate Tribunal be requested to decide the said appeals in a time bound manner.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, has submitted that the order dated 23.02.2022 was passed without granting adequate opportunity to file written statement. It is submitted that the respondent had filed an appeal against the order dated 23.02.2022 i.e. Appeal No.160 of 2024 and in the said proceedings, the respondent has also complied with the provision of Section 43 (5) of The Real Estate (Regulation And Development) Act, 2016 and thus, the rights of the appellants have been protected. It is submitted that since during the pendency of the appeal, an order dated 16.10.2025 for arrest of two directors was passed, thus, another appeal was filed by the respondent i.e. Appeal No.1273 of 2025 in which the Appellate Tribunal has pleased to grant stay. It is submitted that even the respondent herein, who is the appellant before the Tribunal, is ready to argue the matter on the next date of hearing or any date which the Appellate Tribunal deems appropriate. It is PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.03.20 16:32 further submitted that till the time the main appeals are decided, the interim I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh RERA-APPL No.31-2026 (O&M) 3 order dated 21.11.2025 be continued. It is further submitted that the argument on behalf of the appellants that there is a delay of three years in filing the appeal is incorrect.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the grant and continuance of the said interim order should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case and the appellants be permitted to raise all pleas in both the appeals and the Appellate Tribunal be requested to decide the case independently.
4. During the course of arguments, a very fair stand has been taken by the counsel for the appellants as well as the counsel for the respondent and keeping in view the abovesaid fair stand, the present appeal is disposed of with the following observations/directions:
(i) As has been undertaken before this Court, the counsel for the appellants as well as the respondent before the Appellate Tribunal would be ready to argue Appeal No.160 of 2024 as well as Appeal No.1273 of 2025 on 25.04.2026, which is stated to be the next date of hearing in both the appeals or any other date on which the Appellate Tribunal would require the parties to argue. The Appellate Tribunal is requested to decide the appeals as expeditiously as possible.
(ii) Till the time the said appeals are decided, the interim order dated 21.11.2025 would continue. However, the grant and continuance of the said interim order would not be construed as an expression on the merits of both the appeals. It would be PUNEET SACHDEVA 2026.03.20 16:32 open to both the parties to raise all pleas in both the appeals in I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh RERA-APPL No.31-2026 (O&M) 4 accordance with law and the Appellate Tribunal would decide the same independently.
5. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
March 20th, 2026 (VIKAS BAHL)
Puneet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : No
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2026.03.20 16:32
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh