ORDER/JUDGMENT – Shri Raghvendra Dixit, learned counsel for petitioner. Shri Praveen Newaskar, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the interlocutory order dated 16-4-2019 passed by M. P. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Bhopal rejecting an application preferred by the petitioner u/S. 53(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 (for brevity “Act”) filed along with an appeal preferred against the order of M. P. Real Estate Authority dated 26-7-2018 vide P/5 by which sale consideration has been directed to be refunded to the respondent/Bank. 3. The Tribunal while entertaining the application has directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 5 Lakh in compliance of mandatory provisions under section 43(5) of the Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring to provisions of section 53(2) of the Act submits that the Tribunal ought to have waived the entire sale consideration required as a pre-condition for entertainment of appeal. 5. For ready reference and convenience section 53 of the Act in entirety is reproduced below : – “53. Powers of Tribunal. – (1) The Appellate Tribunal shall not be bound by the procedure laid down by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 but shall be guided by the principles of natural justice. (2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Appellate Tribunal shall have power to regulate its own procedure. (3) The Appellate Tribunal shall also not be bound by the rules of evidence contained in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. (4) The Appellate Tribunal shall have, for the purpose of discharging its functions under this Act, the same powers as are vested in a civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in respect of the following matters, namely : – (a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; (b) requiring the discovery and production of documents; (c) receiving evidence on affidavits; (d) issuing commissions for the examinations of witnesses or documents; (e) reviewing its decisions; (f) dismissing an application for default or directing it ex parte; and (g) any other matter which may be prescribed. (5) All proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193, 219 and 228 for the purposes of section 196 of the Indian Penal Code, and the Appellate Tribunal shall be deemed to be civil Court for the purposes of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.” 6. Section 53(2) of the Act empowers the Appellate Tribunal to regulate its own procedure. While doing so the Tribunal can very well expressly lay down procedure to regulate it’s functioning so as to enable it to achieve the object of the Act. However, while doing so the Tribunal has no authority to lay down procedure which is at variance to the substantive provisions of the Act or which defeats the object behind the Act. Section 43 of the Act which deals with right to appeal is a substantive provision and thus any procedural rule framed under section 53(2) of the Act has to further the cause of section 43 of the Act but cannot be to its derogation. 7. For ready reference and convenience, section 43(5) of the Act is reproduced below : – ?43. (1) xxxx (2) xxxx (3) xxxx (4) xxxx (5) Any person aggrieved by any direction or decision or order made by the Authority or by an adjudicating officer under this Act may prefer an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal having jurisdiction over the matter : Provided that where a promoter files an appeal with the Appellate Tribunal, it shall not be entertained, without the promoter first having deposited with the Appellate Tribunal atleast thirty per cent. of the penalty, or such higher percentage as may be determined by the Appellate Tribunal, or the total amount to be paid to the allottee including interest and compensation imposed on him, if any, or with both, as the case may be, before the said appeal is heard.? 8. The power to regulate the procedure does not include the power to meddle with or to tinker with substantial provisions of the Act in view of decision of Apex Court in the case of A. V. Nachane and anr. 8. The power to regulate the procedure does not include the power to meddle with or to tinker with substantial provisions of the Act in view of decision of Apex Court in the case of A. V. Nachane and anr. vs. Union of India and anr., reported in (1982) 1 SCC 205 , the relevant portion of which is reproduced below for ready reference and convenience : – “9..................It is now well settled that it is competent for the legislature to delegate to other authorities the power to frame rules to carry out the purposes of the law made by it (see In re the Delhi Laws Act, Raj Narain Singh vs. Chairman, Patna Administration Committee, Patna and another and D. S. Garewal vs. State of Punjab and another but the essential legislative functions cannot be delegated. What is essential legislative function has been explained by Mukherjea., J. in the Delhi Laws case as follows : “The essential legislative function consists in the determination or choosing of the legislative policy and of formally enacting that policy into a binding rule of conduct. It is open to the legislature to formulate the policy as broadly and with as little or as much details as it thinks proper and it may delegate the rest of the legislative work to a subordinate authority who will work out the details within the framework of that policy”............ 9. In view of above, no case for interference is made out. Consequently, present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution stands dismissed.