Appea I No. AT006000000052935 BEFORE THE MAHARASHTRA REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI Appeal No. AT006000000052935 Complaint No. CC0060OOOOOO5777 t Lokhandwala Kataria Constructions. hrt. Ltd. Versus Kanchan Azad Parikh ... Appellant ... Respondent Adv. Chirag Sarawagi for Appellant. Adv. Floyd Gracias for Respondent. CORAM : SUMANT KOLHE, MEMBER (J) s.s. SANDHU, MEMBER (A) DATE : 10th MARCH,2021. (THROUGH VrDEO CONFERENCTNG) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Learned counsel for Appellant submits that as observed in the order dated 02,02.2021, Appellant had raised the issue of jurisdiction of Adjudicating Officer (AO) to decide the matter pending before the AO. He submits that AO has decided to proceed with the matter for hearing on the point of jurisdiction on 15.03.2021. He apprehends that in case the view is taken by AO contrary to the view already held by this Tribunal in the case of Pankaj Agarwal & Anr. Vs. Real Gem Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. in Appeal No. ATOO5OOOOO0052542 decided on 31.08.2020 serious prejudice will be caused to Appellant and Appellant would be forced to undeftake multiple Appea I No. 4T006000000052935 litigations. It is therefore prayed to stay the proceedings before the AO.
3. Learned counsel for Respondent opposed the submissions made by Appellant.
4. On considering submissions of the Appellant it is observed that it appears that AO is proceeding to conduct hearing on the point of jurisdiction of AO on which categorical ruling is already given by the Tribunal in the case of Pankaj Agarwal (supra) and the same is applled in several cases thereafter. In the circumstances, it is considered appropriate to intervene in the matter and stay the proceedings before the AO to maintain sanctity of process of adjudication under RERA, 2016 and to avoid serious prejudice to the interests of Appellant.
5. We hereby stay the proceedings in complaint No. CC006000000057771pending before the AO till further order,
u)o ap-ul-(su[4ANT KOLHE)s. s. Bmb/-