Chhattisgarh RERA Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Homebuyer’s Appeal Over 1,285-Day Delay

The Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal in Raipur has dismissed an appeal filed by a homebuyer challenging a 2018 order of the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), holding that the appeal was barred by limitation due to an unexplained delay of 1,285 days.

The appeal was filed by Subir Khandelwal against Chhattisgarh Grih Nirman Mandal and other government authorities, questioning a RERA order dated 30 November 2018. The RERA had earlier rejected the complainant’s case, prompting the allottee to approach the appellate tribunal much later, along with an application seeking condonation of delay.

After examining the record, the tribunal noted that under Section 44(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, an appeal must be filed within 60 days from the date of the order. The tribunal observed that even after accounting for the period during which courts were inaccessible due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the delay remained excessive and unjustified.

The bench, comprising Chairman Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta and Member Arvind Singh Cheema, found that the appellant had failed to demonstrate “sufficient cause” for not filing the appeal within the prescribed period. The tribunal recorded that the applicant had remained inactive for long stretches and did not act with due diligence, despite being legally advised and aware of the proceedings.

The tribunal also took note that the appellant had earlier approached the Chhattisgarh High Court by filing a writ petition, which was later withdrawn. Even after withdrawal of the writ petition, no timely steps were taken to pursue the statutory appeal before the appropriate forum.

While rejecting the plea for condonation of delay, the tribunal relied on multiple Supreme Court judgments, reiterating that limitation law is founded on public policy and that liberal interpretation cannot be extended to cases involving gross negligence or lack of bona fide conduct. The tribunal clarified that discretionary powers to condone delay cannot be exercised mechanically or in a routine manner.

Concluding that the delay was inordinate and that the explanation offered was vague and fanciful, the tribunal dismissed the application for condonation of delay. Consequently, the appeal itself was rejected as time-barred. The tribunal directed that each party shall bear its own costs and fixed advocate fees at ₹7,000 per party.

The order reinforces the principle that homebuyers and promoters alike must adhere strictly to statutory timelines under the RERA framework, and that prolonged inaction cannot be excused in the absence of compelling justification.