Chhattisgarh RERA dismisses complaint against Raipur Development Authority, holding land exchange disputes fall outside its jurisdiction.

News Citation : 2026 LN (CG-RERA) 36

June 8, 2026 : The Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has dismissed a complaint filed by two landowners against the Raipur Development Authority (RDA), holding that the dispute arose from a land exchange arrangement executed under the Chhattisgarh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973, and therefore falls outside the jurisdiction of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

The order was passed on June 8, 2026, by a bench comprising Chairperson Sanjay Shukla and Member Dhananjay Devangan in a complaint filed by Rajkumar Agrawal and Shivshankar Agrawal against the Raipur Development Authority in connection with the “Indraprastha Phase-2” development project at Raipura, Raipur.

According to the complainants, they were owners of land situated in Raipura village, Raipur. The land had been acquired for the Indraprastha Phase-2 urban development scheme being implemented by the Raipur Development Authority. In exchange for the acquired land, the authority had allotted them Plot No. E-90 measuring 74.25 square metres under the scheme. An allotment agreement was executed and registered between the parties on June 26, 2014.

The complainants alleged that despite the passage of more than twelve years, the development authority neither completed development of the allotted plot nor handed over possession. They contended that the plot remained unavailable for possession because demarcation and development work had not been completed. The allottees further claimed that repeated representations and personal meetings with officials failed to yield any result.

The applicants stated that they had issued legal notices in April 2023 and January 2024 demanding execution of the transfer deed and delivery of possession. They argued that the continued delay had caused severe financial loss, mental harassment and uncertainty. Seeking relief from RERA, they requested directions for execution of the registered transfer deed, delivery of peaceful possession of the plot, compensation of ₹10 lakh for the prolonged delay and ₹50,000 towards litigation expenses.

Opposing the complaint, the Raipur Development Authority denied allegations of negligence and delay. It submitted that certain assertions made by the complainants were factually incorrect and misleading. The authority informed RERA that it had communicated with the complainants through letters dated March 2, 2026 and April 8, 2026, requesting them to complete necessary formalities and submit relevant documents for further action. According to the authority, the complainants had neither responded to those communications nor approached the authority thereafter.

The authority also explained that the allotted land originally formed part of government land and its transfer process required compliance with statutory procedures. It argued that efforts had been made since 2014 to secure transfer of the land in its favour, but the land was formally transferred only in 2024. Therefore, any delay could not be attributed solely to the development authority. It nevertheless informed the Authority that it was willing to execute the transfer deed and hand over possession in accordance with the applicable procedure.

After considering the pleadings and documents, the Authority framed key issues including whether it possessed jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute and whether the complainants were entitled to any relief. The decisive question before RERA was whether the agreement in question fell within the regulatory framework of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

Examining the nature of the transaction, the Authority noted that the allotment had arisen from a land acquisition and land exchange arrangement executed under Section 56 of the Chhattisgarh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973. It observed that RERA’s jurisdiction extends to disputes involving agreements for sale and violations by promoters under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. However, the present case concerned an exchange of land pursuant to a statutory urban development scheme rather than a conventional promoter-allottee relationship governed by RERA.

In its reasoning, the Authority effectively held that disputes arising from such land exchange agreements do not fall within the scope of adjudication under the Real Estate Act. It concluded that it lacked the authority to examine claims relating to obligations created under the 1973 Town and Country Planning legislation. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed without entering into the merits of the delay, compensation claim or possession dispute.

The ruling highlights an important jurisdictional limitation under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. While RERA serves as a specialised forum for disputes between promoters and allottees in registered real estate projects, not every property-related dispute can be brought before the Authority. Cases arising from land acquisition compensation arrangements, statutory land exchange schemes and obligations created under separate planning laws may have to be pursued before other competent forums.

For landowners and allottees involved in urban development projects, the order serves as a reminder that the nature of the underlying agreement is crucial in determining the appropriate legal remedy. Even where possession has been delayed for several years, a claim may not be maintainable before RERA if the rights and obligations arise from a statutory land exchange framework rather than a real estate sale transaction regulated under the 2016 Act.

Case Reference : M-PRO-2026-03546