Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.53 seconds)
M/S.Alliance Projects vs Palm Flat Owners Welfare Association on 16 November, 2023 cites

M/S Newtech Promoters And Developers ... vs State Of U.P. And 5 Others on 29 January, 2021

5. Per contra, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the corpus fund is intended to be deposited in interest bearing account and the interest accrued is to be utilized for common area maintenance, that too, if the monthly maintenance amount collected from the allottees for common area maintenance was found to be deficient and hence, the contention raised on the side of the appellant that corpus fund was meant for utilization of common area maintenance and there was no interest accrued, is incorrect and contrary to the terms of the construction agreement. Continuing further, the learned senior counsel submitted that the appellant collected two types of Page 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CMSA No.15 of 2023 deposits viz., (i) corpus deposit which is Rs.50/- per square feet of the Super Built Area, and (ii) maintenance deposit which is Rs.2.50 per square feet of the super built area collected in advance for 12 months, as evident from Annexure "AA" of the construction Agreement. Thus, according to the learned senior counsel, the stand of the appellant that corpus fund represents the first-year maintenance charges and is not intended for deposit in an interest bearing account, is utterly false. Referring to the judgment of the Apex Court in M/s.Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd., Vs. State of UP and Others [(2021) SCC Online SC 1044], the learned senior counsel submitted that when the promoter files an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, they have to pay the total amount ordered to be paid to the allottees with interest as a pre-condition, as stated in section 43(5) of the RERA Act. It is also pointed out that the order impugned herein is only to comply with the statutory pre-requisite as contemplated under section 43 of the RERA Act and hence, the appellant may be directed to deposit the interest amount on the alleged corpus fund of Rs.2,03,23,500/- and agitate the issues before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the learned senior counsel sought for dismissal of this appeal.
Allahabad High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

D. M. Wadhwana vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... on 6 April, 1965

In support of his submissions, the leaned senior counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in D.M.Wadhwana Vs. Commissioner of Income-Tax, West Bengal [(1966) 61 ITR 154], wherein, it was observed that 'the set-off of the loss claimed by the assessee cannot be granted, if he did not fulfil the provisions of statute''. With these submissions, the learned senior counsel prayed to allow this appeal by setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal.
Calcutta High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 24 - Full Document
1