Loading…
Loading…
Advocate · Appearances before RERA, NCLT, DRT, the High Court and the Supreme Court
3,086orders and judgmentsAll verified by Editor
Only the judgments in which Puneet Jain's actual appearance is verified from the court record and documents are listed here, and each is manually verified by the lawontips.com team.
Orders 701–725 of 3,086 · Page 29 of 124
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0764/2020 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
In the complainant's complaint, the Bench passed the following orders on 46.42.2020: 4. The respondent is directed to complete all amenities in the complainants' unit in accordance with the allotment letter/agreement, issue a demand letter after the adjustment in accordance with paragraph-2 of the order, ensure that po
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Advocate · Appearances before RERA, NCLT, DRT, the High Court and the Supreme Court
3,086orders and judgmentsAll verified by Editor
Only the judgments in which Puneet Jain's actual appearance is verified from the court record and documents are listed here, and each is manually verified by the lawontips.com team.
Orders 701–725 of 3,086 · Page 29 of 124
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0764/2020 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
In the complainant's complaint, the Bench passed the following orders on 46.42.2020: 4. The respondent is directed to complete all amenities in the complainants' unit in accordance with the allotment letter/agreement, issue a demand letter after the adjustment in accordance with paragraph-2 of the order, ensure that po
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0764/2020 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
In paragraph 2 of its written reply, the opposite party has stated: "In Phase-I we have obtained OC. The physical possession of flat is going on and as on date handed over of flats has been done in 972 flats. In Phase-II, Total [?] Tower No. 19 to Tower No. 29, finishing work is under process and we will start giving p
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0276/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
Presiding: Shri Chaitanya Kumar [?] Complaint No.: ADJ/NCR44/03/52374/2020 Vandana Saxena Versus M/s La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd. This case is presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 20:6. The provision of the Act reads as follows: The Authority may, with a view to correcti
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
The complainant's case was presented on 24.40.2024 through video conferencing. When called, the complainant's husband, Shri Sanjay [?], appeared on behalf of the complainant. The opposite party was absent. By application dated 34.07.2024, the complainant requested that, as per the order dated 26.07.2024, compensation a
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
Date: 08.02.2024 The file came up physically for hearing. The complainant appeared in person. On behalf of the opposite party, a representative, Marketing Manager Shri Anand Kumar, appeared. Both parties were heard at length on the applications submitted by the complainant, Sanjay Saxena, dated 04.08.2023 and dated 2.0
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
E-Court Presiding: Shri Chaitanya Kumar Kulshreshtha Complaint No.: ADI/NCR44/03/52374/2020 Vandana Saxena, 0l, Tower-7, Sector-Tech Zone 4, Nirala Estate, Noida Extension, Gautam Buddha Nagar, 20304, UP. Versus M/s La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd, Pankaj Jain House 100.-95, Second Floor, Ram Vihar, Delhi-0092. The c
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
The application submitted on behalf of the complainant (Vandana Saxena), dated 22-02-2024, was heard and the case file was perused. The complainant has expressed complete disagreement with the order passed by this Court on 08-02-2024, and has requested that it be reconsidered. The applicant's statement is that she had
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 9201819750 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 9201819750 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 420189793 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 420189793 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931471 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Complaint No.: 220:9347! [?] Jagwani versus Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The file has been presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2046, which is provided as follows:- The Authority may, for the purpose of correcting any mistake apparent from the records, at any time within a p
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931471 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
The Complainant's statement [?] was heard and the file was perused. On perusal of the file, it is clear that the Respondent has not complied with the order dated 26.06.209 passed earlier. In this regard, Section 63 of the RERA Act, 2076 reads as follows:- "Section 63 - Penalty for failure to comply with orders of Autho
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 2201931420 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
The Respondent is directed to hand over possession of the Complainant's plot within a month, and to pay the Complainant interest for delay as per the order dated 49.02.2020. The Complainant shall take possession of the plot as stated above. Upload the order on the portal. Date: 3:/08/2024 (Balvinder Kumar) (Member) Utt
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 2201931420 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Complaint No.- 22093420 Surendra Singh versus Sunsity Hi-Tech Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. This matter has been presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 206, which provides as follows:- The Authority may, for the purpose of rectifying any mistake apparent from the records, at any tim
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931132 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Regional Office, Gautam Buddh Nagar Hearing Bench-02 Complaint No.: 220I9332 Sneh Lata Srivastava versus Oasis Buildmart India Pvt. Ltd. 29.08.209 This complaint was filed by Smt. Sneh Lata Srivastava, resident of 86 HIG, Double Story, Near Lollipop School, Malikpuram, Sh
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931132 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Complaint No.: 220/9334432 Lata Srivastava versus Oasis [?] India Pvt. Ltd. The file in this case was reserved for orders. On perusal of the file, it is clear that the Bench, under Section 34 of the RERA Act, passed the following orders in this case on 29.08.2049:- 4. Under the [?] of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regu
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 12201827783 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 12201827211 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
This file has been placed for action under Section 63 of the Act and other relevant provisions, for violation of the order passed earlier. In the complainant's complaint, the Bench had passed the following order on 49.07.2049: 4. The opposite party is directed to ensure that, as soon as the O.C./C.C. of the project/tow
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 1201928588 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 120186108 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 120186108 · for the respondent
9 Oct 2026
9 Oct 2026Hearing orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/10/133170/2025 · for the respondent
E-Court U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority Naveen Bhavan, Rajya Niyojan Sansthan, Kalakankar House, Old Hyderabad, Lucknow Hearing Bench-Adjudicating Officer Complaint No.- ADJ/NCR44/0/I3370/2025 Tapasya Ohri (Complainant) Sumeet Gupta (CoAllottee) v/S Patel Advance JV (Respondent) Due to unavailability of the Bench
8 Oct 2026
8 Oct 2026Hearing orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/09/142078/2026 · for the complainant
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0764/2020 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
In paragraph 2 of its written reply, the opposite party has stated: "In Phase-I we have obtained OC. The physical possession of flat is going on and as on date handed over of flats has been done in 972 flats. In Phase-II, Total [?] Tower No. 19 to Tower No. 29, finishing work is under process and we will start giving p
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/01/0276/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
Presiding: Shri Chaitanya Kumar [?] Complaint No.: ADJ/NCR44/03/52374/2020 Vandana Saxena Versus M/s La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd. This case is presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 20:6. The provision of the Act reads as follows: The Authority may, with a view to correcti
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
The complainant's case was presented on 24.40.2024 through video conferencing. When called, the complainant's husband, Shri Sanjay [?], appeared on behalf of the complainant. The opposite party was absent. By application dated 34.07.2024, the complainant requested that, as per the order dated 26.07.2024, compensation a
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
Date: 08.02.2024 The file came up physically for hearing. The complainant appeared in person. On behalf of the opposite party, a representative, Marketing Manager Shri Anand Kumar, appeared. Both parties were heard at length on the applications submitted by the complainant, Sanjay Saxena, dated 04.08.2023 and dated 2.0
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
E-Court Presiding: Shri Chaitanya Kumar Kulshreshtha Complaint No.: ADI/NCR44/03/52374/2020 Vandana Saxena, 0l, Tower-7, Sector-Tech Zone 4, Nirala Estate, Noida Extension, Gautam Buddha Nagar, 20304, UP. Versus M/s La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd, Pankaj Jain House 100.-95, Second Floor, Ram Vihar, Delhi-0092. The c
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/03/52374/2020 · for the respondent
The application submitted on behalf of the complainant (Vandana Saxena), dated 22-02-2024, was heard and the case file was perused. The complainant has expressed complete disagreement with the order passed by this Court on 08-02-2024, and has requested that it be reconsidered. The applicant's statement is that she had
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 9201819750 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 9201819750 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 420189793 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 420189793 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931471 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Complaint No.: 220:9347! [?] Jagwani versus Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The file has been presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2046, which is provided as follows:- The Authority may, for the purpose of correcting any mistake apparent from the records, at any time within a p
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931471 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
The Complainant's statement [?] was heard and the file was perused. On perusal of the file, it is clear that the Respondent has not complied with the order dated 26.06.209 passed earlier. In this regard, Section 63 of the RERA Act, 2076 reads as follows:- "Section 63 - Penalty for failure to comply with orders of Autho
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 2201931420 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
The Respondent is directed to hand over possession of the Complainant's plot within a month, and to pay the Complainant interest for delay as per the order dated 49.02.2020. The Complainant shall take possession of the plot as stated above. Upload the order on the portal. Date: 3:/08/2024 (Balvinder Kumar) (Member) Utt
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 2201931420 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Complaint No.- 22093420 Surendra Singh versus Sunsity Hi-Tech Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. This matter has been presented under Section 39 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 206, which provides as follows:- The Authority may, for the purpose of rectifying any mistake apparent from the records, at any tim
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931132 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Regional Office, Gautam Buddh Nagar Hearing Bench-02 Complaint No.: 220I9332 Sneh Lata Srivastava versus Oasis Buildmart India Pvt. Ltd. 29.08.209 This complaint was filed by Smt. Sneh Lata Srivastava, resident of 86 HIG, Double Story, Near Lollipop School, Malikpuram, Sh
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 2201931132 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Complaint No.: 220/9334432 Lata Srivastava versus Oasis [?] India Pvt. Ltd. The file in this case was reserved for orders. On perusal of the file, it is clear that the Bench, under Section 34 of the RERA Act, passed the following orders in this case on 29.08.2049:- 4. Under the [?] of the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regu
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 12201827783 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 12201827211 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
This file has been placed for action under Section 63 of the Act and other relevant provisions, for violation of the order passed earlier. In the complainant's complaint, the Bench had passed the following order on 49.07.2049: 4. The opposite party is directed to ensure that, as soon as the O.C./C.C. of the project/tow
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. 1201928588 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 120186108 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. 120186108 · for the respondent
9 Oct 2026
9 Oct 2026Hearing orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/10/133170/2025 · for the respondent
E-Court U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority Naveen Bhavan, Rajya Niyojan Sansthan, Kalakankar House, Old Hyderabad, Lucknow Hearing Bench-Adjudicating Officer Complaint No.- ADJ/NCR44/0/I3370/2025 Tapasya Ohri (Complainant) Sumeet Gupta (CoAllottee) v/S Patel Advance JV (Respondent) Due to unavailability of the Bench
8 Oct 2026
8 Oct 2026Hearing orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. ADJ/NCR144/09/142078/2026 · for the complainant