Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tdi Infrastructure Ltd vs Raj Kumar on 19 November, 2025
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M)
Date of decision : 19.11.2025
TDI Infrastructure Ltd.
... Appellant
Versus
Raj Kumar
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Ms.Arundhati, Advocate for
Mr.Shobit Phutela, Advocate
for the appellant.
Mr. Ravinder Singh Randhawa, Senior Advocate with
Mr.Varun Tuteja, Advocate
for the respondent.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
CM-13409-C-2025
1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with proviso to Section 58 of the RERA Act, 2016 for condonation of delay of 163 days in filing the accompanying appeal.
2. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed and delay of 163 days in filing the accompanying appeal is condoned.
Main case
1. Challenge in the present appeal is to the order dated 10.03.2025 1 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2025 12:28:52 ::: RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M) 2 vide which the appeal filed by the present appellant has been dismissed on the ground of delay.
2. On 29.10.2025, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
"Present:- Mr. Shobit Phutela, Advocate, and Mr. Shourya Mehra, Advocate for the appellant.
*** On a query put by this Court, learned counsel for the appellant has fairly submitted that the appellant is ready to compensate the respondent for the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal.
Notice in the application for condonation of delay as well as in the main appeal for 19.11.2025.
To be taken up immediately after the urgent list. Liberty is granted to the appellant to serve the respondent through dasti process also.
The pre-deposit amount would be paid to the respondent-allottee along with interest accrued thereon, subject to tax liability, as directed in para 11 of the impugned order, subject to further directions given by this Court.
Appellant would also bring a demand draft of Rs.50,000/- in the name of respondent as compensation for the delay in filing the first appeal.
October 29, 2025"
2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2025 12:28:52 ::: RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M) 3
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in pursuance of the said order, the appellant has got a demand draft of Rs.50,000/- in the name of the respondent as compensation for delay in filing the first appeal, which demand draft has been handed over to Sh.Varun Tuteja, assisting counsel to the learned senior counsel and which fact has been reaffirmed by the learned senior counsel for the respondent.
4. Learned senior counsel for the respondent has submitted that the acceptance of the said amount of Rs.50,000/- should not be construed as an estoppel against the respondent from opposing the appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal on merits. It is further submitted that an amount of Rs.24,38,171/- which had been deposited by the promoter in view of proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 along with interest, which has now been remitted to the Authority, be released to the respondent and direction be given to the Authority to release the said amount to the respondent and liberty be also granted to the respondent to raise all the pleas to oppose the appeal on merits.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that she has no objection to the said course of action but has submitted that the release of the amount in favour of the respondent should not be construed as an estoppel on the appellant from pursuing its appeal on merits and the said release in favour of the respondent be made subject to the final decision in appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal on merits.
3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2025 12:28:52 ::: RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M) 4
6. Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances and the fair stand taken on behalf of the appellant as well as the respondent, the present appeal is partly allowed and the order dated 10.03.2025 to the extent that the appeal of the present appellant has been dismissed on the ground of delay is set aside and the delay in filing the said appeal is condoned and the Appellate Tribunal is requested to decide the appeal on merits, subject to the following observations / directions :-
i) The amount of Rs.24,38,171/- along with interest which has been deposited by the present appellant with the Tribunal in view of proviso to Section 43(5) of the Act, which is now stated to have been remitted to the Authority, would be released to the respondent-Raj Kumar by the Authority within a period of two weeks from the date the respondent moves an application before the Authority regarding the same. The same would be subject to tax liability as mentioned in para 11 of the order dated 10.03.2025.
ii) The release of the said amount would be subject to the decision in the main appeal. However, the present order should not be construed to mean that the amount is not to be released to the respondent as the same is to be done in accordance with direction no.(i) reproduced hereinabove.
iii) The payment of the amount of Rs.50,000/- and the acceptance of Rs.50,000/- as well as the release of the amount 4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2025 12:28:52 ::: RERA-APPL-173-2025(O&M) 5 would not be construed as an estoppel against either of the parties from raising all the pleas on the merits of the case and it would be open to the parties to raise all the pleas in accordance with law before the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal is requested to decide the same on merits.
7. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of in view of the abovesaid order.
(VIKAS BAHL) JUDGE November 19, 2025.
Davinder Kumar
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 22-11-2025 12:28:52 :::