EMU LINES PRIVATE LIMITED vs PRESERVE FACILITEEX PRIVATE LIMITED
Party Details
- EMU LINES PRIVATE LIMITED
- PRESERVE FACILITEEX PRIVATE LIMITED
Case Summary
EMU LINES PRIVATE LIMITED filed Case No. RERA-GRG-8039-2022 in the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) against PRESERVE FACILITEEX PRIVATE LIMITED. The case has undergone 2 hearings over 2 months. The case is currently pending. 3 orders have been issued in this matter.
Hearing History (2)
- 20SEP 2023Hearing
Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL
The present complaint was filed on 12.01.2023 and was fixed for appearance as well as filing of reply by the respondent. However, no reply has been filed by the respondent till date rather an application challenging maintainability of complaint has been filed vide which it has been submitted that the respondent company is only a maintenance agency maintaining the upkeep of the project and is neither a promoter or Real Estate Agent. Further as per Section 31 of the RERA Act, any aggrieved person may file a complaint for violation or contravention of the provisions of the act against promoter, allottee or real estate agent. But the respondent being maintenance agency does not fall within the ambit of the Act of 2016. Hence, the current complaint is not maintainable and thus is liable to be dismissed. None has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant today and neither on the last date of hearing wherein one last opportunity was granted to the complainant to respond to the application for maintainability and to further pursue the matter. But despite the above opportunity, no reply to the above application of maintainability has been filed by the complainant till date and neither the complainant is putting in appearance. In view of the above, the matter stands dismissed in default. File be consigned to the registry.
Stage: DISMISSED
- 12JUL 2023Hearing
Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN
The present complaint was filed on 12.01.2023 and was fixed for appearance as well as filing of reply by the respondent. However, no reply has been filed by the respondent till date rather an application challenging maintainability of complaint has been filed vide which it submitted that the respondent company is only a maintenance agency maintaining the upkeep of the project. As per Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 any aggrieved person may file a complaint for violation or contravention of the provisions of the act against promoter, allottee or real estate agent. But the respondent being maintenance agency does not fall within the ambit of the Act of 2016. Hence, the current complaint is liable to be dismissed. He further cites case No.218 of 2019 decided on 06.04.2021 of RERA Panchkula wherein it has been held that cases of dispute between the allottee and the maintenance agency do not fall under the purview of RERA Act, 2016. Case has been called out but no one has appeared on behalf of the complainant. One last and more opportunity is granted to the complainant to respond to the application for maintainability and further pursue the matter. Matter to come up on 20.09.2023 for further proceedings.
Stage: FIRST HEARING
Orders (3)
- 20SEP 2023judgementView Order ↗
Order No: N/A
- 20SEP 2023orderView Order ↗
Order No: N/A
- 12JUL 2023orderView Order ↗
Order No: N/A
Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗
HARYANA REAI ESIAIE REGUTAIORY AUTHORIIY HAREBA GURUGRAM H* n-"* FdFrqrro qlft6{ul' t\srrrq Fnocenutlcs oF THE DAY Day and Date Complaint No.
Complainant Represented through Respondent Respondent RePresented through Last date ofhearing Proceeding Recorded bY # eunuonRv ; Pwo Rest Hou'q1Ly91qg$gry .----t.-ol l1q *Se" q*=qel WednesdaY and ZO 09'20?3 CR/80391?022 Case Private Limited Vs Private Limited EMU Lines Private Limited Shri UdaY Kumar, Advocate Preserve Faciliteex Private Limited Ms Shikha, ProxY counsel 1.2.7 .2023 Naresh Kumari and HR Mehta titled as EMU Lines Preserve Faciliteex --t Proceedings The Dresent complaint was frled on 12 01 2023 and was fixed for appearance "r *ir "lnrtrg "i reply by the respondent , - r,r ;^rd ,{drher an ?r,:"-";;".;;;;;";;""" ntea uv tt'e respondent tlr date rlather an appl ication chalre"*, ^* r",n,'' ^'oiuJ-1,i'-ffi };:*:lrtIilf :Jll'.l applicatlon cnarre,r"'r "*"'-l'-- respond"nt co*pany is only a mahtenance :-:ilfi"#*il;T::li:fi l?:;i1i*:tlr'^T:Iff #[.""1,;:::1 agency malntalnrng t"" ""^.*I "'ion i, ot,n" *uRA o.t, any aggrievled person '#Tl',;::JJx::t1Tili':'J:i:":",.r*;;iixt:s:$llnr: may file a comptat* ror vrurauv.,"' ".ir," ,*"*.
But the respon+nt.bernB asainst promoter' '':n""-::.:ilii'" ,."Tn,,'r'i, the Act of 20f 6.
Henc'" maintenance agency does not tal ^,^ r,^rr- t^ r,e dilmissed. ffi ::".::ff:ffiTlffi ffi;';';uui" "na tnu' i' ti"o*." o' o1:':':::^- None has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant bda' fil::rfi: ;;;";r';; "it'"uting wherein one last opportunitv w* ttT::";;;; ;;;;r't;;; t"spond to the application for maintainabilitv,:i: ;";;;: ;;ffi;;;;""r' But despite the above opportunitv' no reprv f r"E duuv! * T,o'b ffiEi lffi€-or-fildtrE TRe com i'"'nn.. iir" .r.r,ainant is putting in appearance' ln view ofthe above, the matter stands dismissed in default File be ff HARERA H ounuennvt HARYANA REAT ESIAIE REGUIAIORY AUIHORIIY GURUGRAM Cftqrrn +[-dq-< --effi **-*"*:%1##i*'?iH;;;"'m;; a€s Tiry !tsY l,l - a2 Y l,l - a2 Viiay Kuli'ar GoYal Member 20.09.2023