High Court of DelhiCM(M)/652/2019

Ramprastha Promoters & Developers Pvt Ltd v. Rajesh Kumar

2019-04-26Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Yogesh Khanna3 pages

$~78 to 83 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CM(M) 652/2019 & CM. Nos. 19659/2019 & 19660/2019 + CM(M) 653/2019 & CM. Nos. 19661/2019 & 19662/2019 + CM(M) 654/2019 & CM. Nos. 19663/2019 & 19664/2019 + CM(M) 655/2019 & CM. Nos. 19665/2019 & 19666/2019 + CM(M) 656/2019 & CM. Nos. 19667/2019 & 19668/2019 + CM(M) 657/2019 & CM. Nos. 19669/2019 & 19670/2019 RAMPRASTHA PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD.

..... Petitioner(s) Through:

Mr. Sougat Sinha, Mr. Nitin Sharma and Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advs.

versus RAJESH KUMAR VED PRAKASH BALDEV GODARA & ANR VARUN AGGARWAL NILUTPOL BORA & ANR VIDYA KULKARNI ..... Respondent(s) Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO

O R D E R

% 26.04.2019 These matters have been listed vide supplementary list circulated in the post lunch session in view of the mentioning made before Hon'ble the Chief Justice and in view of order dated 26th April, 2019, on the

administrative side.

CM. No.19660/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 652/2019 CM. No.19662/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 653/2019 CM. No.19664/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 654/2019 CM. No.19666/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 655/2019 CM. No.19668/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 656/2019 CM. No.19670/2019 (for exemption) in CM(M) 657/2019 Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Applications stand disposed of.

CM(M) 652/2019 & CM. No. 19659/2019 CM(M) 653/2019 & CM. No. 19661/2019 CM(M) 654/2019 & CM. No. 19663/2019 CM(M) 655/2019 & CM. No. 19665/2019 CM(M) 656/2019 & CM. No. 19667/2019 CM(M) 657/2019 & CM. No. 19669/2019 Learned counsel for the petitioner states that these petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated April 15, 2019 passed by the NCDRC in the petitions filed against the petitioner herein. He states the petitioner has challenged the jurisdiction of the NCDRC to entertain the petitions in view of the provisions of the Real Estate (Regularisation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA). He also states that similar petition has been entertained by this Court, whereby the operation of the impugned order rejecting the plea of the petitioners therein of jurisdiction has been stayed. [Ref:- CM(M) 610/2019, Mist Direct Sales Pvt. Ltd. v. Jayant Nagar]. He seeks similar benefit in these petitions as well.

Learned counsel for the petitioner also fairly concedes that the petitions, wherein impugned orders have been passed have been reserved for judgment by the NCDRC. If that be so, no parity can be sought by the petitioners qua the petition pending in this Court being CM (M) 610/2019, Mist Direct Sales Pvt. Ltd. vs. Jayant Nagar, as admittedly in the said case, arguments have not been heard nor the NCDRC has reserved the case for judgment. Once the petitions have been reserved for orders, the same cannot be stayed.

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw these petitions. The petitions and connected applications are dismissed as withdrawn.

V. KAMESWAR RAO, J APRIL 26, 2019/aky