CPC Provision For First-Stage Rejection Of Complaints Not Applicable To RERA If Actionable Claims Exist: HP RERA

The Himachal Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HP RERA) has recently held that a complaint disclosing a prima facie cause of action under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 cannot be rejected at the threshold by invoking a Civil Procedure Code provision meant for rejection of complaints.A coram comprising Chairperson R D Dhiman and Members Amit Kashyap and Vidur Mehta, in an order dated December 22, 2025, said RERA proceedings are summary in nature and factual disputes must be decided on merits. The authority observed that “Order VII Rule 11 CPC can be invoked only when, on the face of the complaint, no cause of action is disclosed or the complaint is barred by law,” and not where actionable facts are pleaded. The complaint was filed by Bithu Indrajit Basu against developers Rajdeep and Rajdeep and Company Infrastructure Private Limited. She alleged that despite making substantial payments and being assured possession by June 2024, a flat in Tower D of the project in Shimla was never handed over. According to her, the respondents projected themselves as promoters, collected money for construction and failed to complete the project within time. During the proceedings, the developers sought rejection of the complaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code. They claimed there was no privity of contract, as the flat was purchased from a third party, Shakuntala Sharma. They also argued that HP RERA lacked jurisdiction since the project was allegedly not required to be registered under the Act. Basu opposed the plea, calling it a delay tactic raised at a late stage, and pointed out that payments were made to the developers and possession was promised by them as promoters. Dismissing the plea seeking dismissal of the complaint, the authority held that the complainant had clearly pleaded delayed possession, payment of consideration, and failure to complete construction. It said these averments “clearly disclose a valid, substantive, and actionable cause of action” under RERA. The bench added that issues such as whether the respondents acted as promoters of the project, whether they received money, and whether they promised possession are factual disputes that “cannot be adjudicated at the stage of Order VII Rule 11.” On the applicability of the CPC, the authority said the RERA Act specifically lists the CPC provisions that apply to its proceedings. Holding that the provisions that are expressly included and not excluded. the tribunal said that Order VII Rule 11, stand excluded. It concluded that “the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC fails to satisfy any of the grounds prescribed under the said provision and, moreover, has no applicability to the proceedings of RERA.” The promoters' application was dismissed, and the complaint was allowed to proceed on its merits. Case Title: Bithu Indrajit Basu v. Rajdeep & Anr.Complaint Number: HPERA2024012/CMA No.: 1-R2/32-2024 Coram: R D.Dhiman (Chairperson), Amit Kashyap (Member), Vidur Mehta (Member)Appearances: Sameer Thakur for the complainant; Shakti Bhardwaj for the respondents Click Here To Read/Download Order

CPC Provision For First-Stage Rejection Of Complaints Not Applicable To RERA If Actionable Claims Exist: HP RERA

Shivani PS

Tags