1 2025:CGHC:40403-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MA No. 69 of 2025 • Kanhaiya Lal Patel S/o Late Tikaram Patel Aged About 64 Years R/o Rukhmani Vihar Colony, Kotra Road, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant. versus 1 - Rukmani Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Director Shri Ashok Kumar Agrawal, Hotel Ansh, Dhimrapur, Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Learned Adjudicating Officer Through The Registrar, Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Chhattisgarh, Shastri Chowk, RERA Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Through Its Registrar, Maulshree Vihar Colony, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Appellant : Shri Roop Ram Naik, Advocate. For Respondent No.1 : None. Division Bench Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal & Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.08.14 16:46:12 +0530 2 Judgment on Board (12.08.2025) Sanjay K. Agrawal, J. 1. This Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was admitted for hearing on 15.04.2025 on following substantial question of law:- "Whether the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal is justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground that appellant has failed to show sufficient cause for delay of 95 days in preferring appeal, by recording a finding which is perverse to the record ?" 2. The aforesaid substantial question of law arose on following factual backdrop:- 3. The Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Raipur (for short “RERA”) passed an order on 12.04.2024 against the appellant, against which, appellant herein preferred an appeal before the appellate authority i.e. Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Raipur (for short “Tribunal”) on 18.09.2024 with a delay of 95 days assigning reasons that in his house his properties were stolen on account of which, he was under depression and his father- in-law namely Kanval Say Patel suffered fracture in the month of July, 2024 and was admitted in the hospital, and the appellant was the only care taker and ultimately, appellant’s father-in-law died on 05.09.2024. Therefore, for such reasons, he could not prefer the appeal on time and delay in filing the appeal may be condoned. 3 4. The learned Tribunal vide impugned order dated 03.02.2025 rejected the application as sufficient cause has not been shown for the delay in filing the appeal. Against which, this Appeal has been preferred. 5. Shri Roop Ram Naik, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned Tribunal was too technical in considering the delay occured in filing the appeal as sufficient cause has been shown and the appeal has been dismissed. 6. Though notice has been served on Respondent No.1, however, no representation is made on his behalf. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and went through the record with utmost circumspection. 8. It is the case of the appellant that RERA passed an order on 12.04.2024, against which, he preferred an appeal on 18.09.2024 with a delay of 95 days for which, he has assigned reasons that his valuables were stolen from his house and his father-in-law also suffered fracture who ultimately died on 05.09.2024, therefore, he could not prefer the appeal on time. Further, the appellant also filed affidavit in support of his prayer for condonation of delay. Reply was filed but it was not supported with any affidavit. 9. In our considered opinion, sufficient cause has been shown for the delay of 95 days in filing the appeal. 4 10.Accordingly, delay of 95 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the impugned order is set aside. 11.The substantial question of law is answered accordingly. 12.The Matter is remitted back to Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Raipur for deciding the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law expeditiously. 13.The Appeal is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Judge Avinash