Case Analysis: Sheela Sadhwani & Others vs. Shivshakti Realhome - Understanding RERA Act Implications in Rajasthan

Delving into the Sheela Sadhwani vs. Shivshakti Realhome case! Join us as we analyze the significance of RERA Act compliance in Rajasthan real estate. #RERA #RealEstate #LegalBattle

Case Analysis: Sheela Sadhwani & Others vs. Shivshakti Realhome - Understanding RERA Act Implications in Rajasthan
Sheela Sadhwani & Others vs. Shivshakti Realhome - Understanding RERA Act Implications in Rajasthan

In the dynamic landscape of the real estate sector, disputes between buyers and developers are not uncommon. One such case that has garnered attention is that of Sheela Sadhwani & Others against Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd. This legal battle revolves around the non-delivery of a flat, No. 602 Wing E, in the renowned "Shivraj Residency" project. Let's delve into the intricate details of this case and understand its significance within the realm of real estate.

Understanding the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act)

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, commonly known as the RERA Act, is a landmark legislation introduced to regulate the real estate sector in India. Its primary objectives are to promote transparency, accountability, and fair practices in the industry. Under section 31 of the RERA Act, aggrieved parties can file complaints with the respective state's Real Estate Regulatory Authority.

In this case, the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Jaipur, holds the jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute between the complainant, Sheela Sadhwani & Others, and the respondent, Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd.

Case Background

The heart of the dispute lies in the coveted flat No. 602 Wing E, part of the illustrious "Shivraj Residency" project. The property's registration number is RAJ/P/2017/015, which is crucial to the legal proceedings. The agreement for sale between the complainant and the respondent was executed on 22nd April 2019, outlining the terms and conditions for possession.

Allegations and Reliefs Sought

Sheela Sadhwani & Others claim that despite paying Rs. 31.60 lakh out of the total unit cost of Rs. 35,30,000/-, Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd. failed to fulfill their end of the agreement. The complainant alleges non-delivery of the flat within the stipulated time frame, as specified in clause 7.1 of the agreement (31st December 2020).

Seeking justice, the complainant has put forth several reliefs, including a complete refund of the deposited amount with 18% interest from the payment date. Additionally, they demand compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- and Rs. 51,000/- for the incurred litigation expenses. Sheela Sadhwani & Others also want the respondent to be held accountable for breaching the RERA Act's provisions, and illegal demands to be prohibited until the resolution of the dispute.

Upon receiving the complaint, the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority initiated the process by issuing a notice to the respondent, Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd., and granting them 30 days to respond. Unfortunately, the respondent failed to file a reply or appear at the hearing. Consequently, an ex-parte hearing took place, where only the complainant's advocate presented the case.

Analysis of RERA Act Compliance

The crux of the matter lies in clause 7.1 of the agreement, which sets the deadline for possession. Interestingly, the project's registration with the Authority initially mentioned the completion date as 31st December 2020. Subsequently, the promoter sought an extension until 31st December 2022, which was granted. However, the project is now categorized as "lapsed" unless information about a subsequent application for registration validity extension surfaces.

Decision and Orders

After careful examination of the case and the RERA Act's provisions, the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority ruled in favor of the complainant. As per the order, Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd. is directed to refund the deposited amount along with interest at 8.6% (highest MCLR + 2%) from 1st January 2021 (excluding any moratorium) within 45 days of the order's copy being uploaded on the Authority's website. Non-compliance may lead to recovery proceedings under section 40 of the RERA Act within two years from the order's issuance.

Implications and Future Actions

The Authority's decision holds significant implications for the real estate sector, underscoring the importance of adhering to the RERA Act's provisions. The case serves as a stark reminder to developers to honor agreements and ensure timely delivery of properties.

For the complainant, while the refund and interest are secured, the quest for compensation lies outside the Authority's purview. Thus, they are advised to pursue appropriate channels to seek further compensation.


The case of Sheela Sadhwani & Others vs. Shivshakti Realhome Pvt. Ltd. sheds light on the complexities involved in real estate transactions and the role of the RERA Act in safeguarding buyers' interests. Through this comprehensive analysis, we understand the significance of compliance and transparency in the real estate sector. As the industry continues to evolve, the RERA Act remains a vital instrument in ensuring fairness and accountability in real estate dealings.

Note: The information provided in this article about Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RRERA) is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal or professional advice and readers should consult qualified professionals for advice specific to their circumstances. The information provided in this article is based on the Comp. No. RAJ-RERA-C-N-2022-5637 before the Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority

We hope you found our blog insightful and engaging! We appreciate your time and interest. If you enjoyed reading it, don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter to receive regular updates on our latest content. Visit our website to know more.