LARSEN TOUBRO LIMITED vs. STATE OF U.P. & ORS (2024)
LEGAL SUBJECTS - Real Estate Law, Administrative Law, Contract Law, Constitutional Law
CITATION OF THE CASE -
2024:AHC:160155-DB.
FACTS -
Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T) entered into an agreement with Jaiprakash Associates Limited (JAL) for the development of four towers in "Jaypee Greens Wish Town." L&T applied for registration of the first two towers with the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (UPRERA) on June 2, 2023. However, UPRERA requested clarification regarding the project's land status related to a resolution plan involving Suraksha Realtors Pvt. Limited and Lakshadweep Investments and Finance Private Limited. Despite L&T asserting its rights over the project through registered agreements and stating that JAL should not be considered a 'Promoter,' UPRERA rejected the application and directed L&T to reapply. After multiple attempts to clarify its position and reapply, UPRERA continued to object to L&T's registration requests, leading to a significant delay. Eventually, UPRERA issued a notice to L&T for allegedly violating Section 3 of RERA by advertising a project that was not registered.
ISSUES -
Whether UPRERA was obligated to grant registration after the statutory 30-day period had elapsed without a decision? What is the applicability of the deeming clause under Section 5(2) of RERA, which states that applications not decided within 30 days are deemed approved?
DECISION BY COURT -
a) The Allahabad High Court ruled in favour of Larsen & Toubro Limited. The court held that UPRERA had no authority to keep the application pending beyond the mandatory 30-day period stipulated by RERA It emphasized that once this period lapsed, L&T's application was deemed approved, obligating UPRERA to provide a registration number and access credentials for its project. The court criticized UPRERA for its conduct, noting that it proceeded to reject L&T's applications despite an interim order preventing such actions during ongoing proceedings. Ultimately, the court allowed L&T's writ petition and confirmed that UPRERA was bound to recognize the project as registered.
IMPORTANCE OF THE CASE -
The ruling emphasizes that developers have rights under RERA that must be respected, particularly concerning timely registration. It illustrates the role of judicial oversight in holding regulatory authorities accountable for their actions and ensuring compliance with statutory obligations. This decision sets a precedent for similar cases where regulatory authorities may attempt to delay approvals beyond statutory limits, thereby strengthening developers' positions in future disputes.
Compiled by Adv. Bincy Benny, Research and Training Admin, ATPA
