February 12, 2026 : The Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal in Raipur has set aside an earlier order passed by the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) in a dispute between Jaiprakash Keswani and M/s Admire Infrazone Pvt. Ltd., directing the authority to re-hear the matter and dispose of it within two months.

The order was delivered on February 11, 2026, by the bench comprising Chairman Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta and Member Arvind Singh Cheema in Appeal No. 375/2026.

Jaiprakash Keswani had challenged the RERA’s decision dated September 24, 2025, in which his complaint was dismissed at the preliminary stage on the ground that the dispute was purely civil in nature and beyond the authority’s jurisdiction.

According to the case details, Keswani had entered into agreements in December 2019 for the purchase of Unit No. GR-04, measuring 4,390 square feet, located at Khasra No. 32/61 in Sejbahar, Raipur. The total consideration was Rs 3.21 crore, out of which Rs 2.40 crore had already been paid. The disputed plot formed part of the approved layout plan and the real estate project of the respondent company.

However, a key issue arose because Phase 1 of the project was registered with RERA, while the disputed plot fell under Phase 2, which was not registered. The respondent argued that RERA lacked jurisdiction, also raising objections about alleged inconsistencies between the agreements and claiming delay.

The tribunal closely examined the definitions under Sections 2(d), 2(zk), and 2(zn) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. It observed that a project does not cease to be a “real estate project” merely because it is unregistered. The bench noted that where land is developed into plots for sale, it qualifies as a real estate project under the Act.

The tribunal further held that the appellant qualified as an “allottee” and the respondent as a “promoter” within the meaning of the Act. It found that the RERA’s conclusion that the matter was purely civil and outside its jurisdiction was not justified.

Referring to Section 31(1) of the Act, the tribunal stated that any aggrieved person may file a complaint for violations under the Act. It also clarified that Section 79, which bars civil court jurisdiction in matters under RERA’s domain, did not prevent the authority from adjudicating the dispute in this case.

The bench ultimately ruled that RERA does have jurisdiction to resolve the dispute between the parties. The earlier order dismissing the complaint was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the RERA for fresh consideration.

The authority has been directed to re-admit the complaint under its original number and dispose of it in accordance with law within two months from receipt of the tribunal’s order. Both parties have been directed to appear before RERA on February 19, 2026.

The respondent has been directed to bear his own costs as well as the costs of the appellant. Advocate fees have been fixed at Rs 7,000 for each party.

The ruling is significant as it clarifies that RERA jurisdiction can extend to disputes involving projects that may not have been formally registered, provided they fall within the statutory definition of a real estate project under the 2016 Act.

Case Reference : Appeal No. 375/2026, Shri Jaiprakash Keswani vs M/s Admire Infrazone Pvt. Ltd. through its Directors Dilip Pahuja, Dinesh Pahuja and Chayan Pahuja; Counsel for Appellant/Complainant: Mr. Shashwat Surana, Advocate; Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Shishir Shrivastava, Advocate.