| Party Dtls | Self / Adv Name | District | Current Status | Next Date of Hearing | Complaint Dispatched | Complaint Dispatched On | Dispatched Tracking Id | Complaint Dispatched Remarks | First-Hearing/Scrutinized Remarks | View Notice |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SONIA MEHTA V/S VATIKA LTD. |
ADITYA BHARECH | GURUGRAM | DISPOSED | NOT REQUIRED | Not Yet | FIRST HEARING | -- |
| S No. | Complaint-ID | Complaint-Type | Status | Next Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | RERA-GRG-1393-2023 | Execution | ONLINE COMPLAINT NOT YET RECEIVED AT OFFICE | NA |
| 2 | RERA-GRG-2506-2023 | Execution | SINE DIE | NA |
| Date of Hearing | Status | Proceedings of the day | Bench | Order | Order Uploaded On |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02-Dec-2022 | DISPOSED | Order pronounced. Assured return is allowed. Detailed order will follow. Matter stands disposed off. File be consigned to the registry. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA | --- | --- |
| 28-Oct-2022 | PENDING | present complaint has been received on 20.12.201 and the reply was received on 21.07.2022. Succinct facts of the case are as under: S.no. Particulars Details 1. Name of the project High Street, Inxt City Center, Gurugram, Haryana 2. Allotment letter 19.06.2017 (page 45 of complaint) 3. Date of builder buyer agreement Not executed 4. Unit no. 134, first floor admeasuring 1125 sq.ft. (page 45 of complaint) 7. Provision regarding assured return 4. The developer shall remit an assured monthly return of RS. 92.16 per sq.ft. till completion of the building. It is stated that the project is in advance stages of construction and the developer based on its present plans and estimates and subject to all just exceptions, contemplates to complete construction of the said building/said commercial unit soon. 5. The Allottee authorizes the developer to lease out the said unit, which is part of the commercial complex(mention name of the project) and agrees that the obligation of the developer shall be to lease the said unit along with the other commercial spaces in the commercial complex. The developer shall lease the unit along with the premises @RS. 100/- per sq.ft. However, in the eventuality the achieved lease return being higher or lower than Rs. 100/- per sq.ft. the following would be applicable. a. If the achieved rental is less than Rs. 100/- per sq.ft. then you shall be refunded @Rs. 133.33/- per sq.ft. for every Rs. 1/- by which achieved rental is less then Rs. 100/- per sq.ft. b. If the achieved rental is more then 100/- per sq.ft. shall be liable to pay additional sales consideration @Rs. 66.67/- per sq.ft. for every rupee of additional rental achieved. 8. Due date of possession Cannot be ascertained 10. Total sale consideration Rs. 48,90,375 (page 41 of complaint) 11. Paid up amount Rs. 48,90,375 (page 43 of complaint) 12. Offer of possession Not offered 13. Occupation certificate Not obtained The counsel for the respondent requests for placing on record a copy of order passed by Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Gurugram dated 19.04.2022 wherein it has been held that assured return cannot be paid in view of BUDS Act till the concerned company registers itself with SEBI for being part of collective investment scheme or satisfied the court for the requirement of being part of regulated deposit scheme within the provisions of BUDS Act. Further a copy of the order of Hon’ble J&K High Court is also being placed on the file. The counsel for the respondent is directed to supply a copy of the same to the counsel for the complainant. However, the counsel for the complainant while disputing the relevance of above orders in the claim of complaint under Act of 2016 and further states that the authority vide a detailed order in complaint titled as Vinod Agarwal versus Vatika Ltd. has passed a detailed order on the rights of assured return and the complainant also seeks the relief of assured return in terms of that order. Arguments heard. Order reserved. Matter to come up on 02.12.2022 for pronouncement of orders. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA | View Order | 15-Nov-2022 |
| 20-Jul-2022 | PENDING | The present complaint was filed on 20.12.2021 and registered as complaint No. 4922 of 2021. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint along with annexures made to the respondent has been submitted by the complainant as available in the file. The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post of which delivery confirmed on 27.12.2021 as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at following email address: virendhar@vatikagroup.com and the same is shown to have been delivered on the above email address as per the report available in the file. It is proper service of the notice. On last date of hearing Sh. Venkat Rao advocate has appeared on behalf of the respondent and requested an adjournment for filing reply. The request of the respondent counsel was allowed and counsel for respondent was directed to file reply subject to cost of Rs. 5000/- to be paid to the complainant. Neither any reply filed nor any cost paid by the respondent till date. The counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has stated at bar that the reply is ready and is being supplied to the complainant and is being submitted in the registry. He is directed to file the reply in the registry within two days with an advance copy to the complainant by tomorrow positively. Costs of Rs.5,000/- imposed on the previous date of hearing has been paid by the respondent to the complainant today in cash. In case the reply is not supplied to the complainant within the stipulated period then the complainant may file an application in the authority for non-filing of reply by the respondent and for which further cost of Rs.10,000/- shall be payable to the complainant by the respondent. Matter to come up on 28.10.2022 for final arguments. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 23-Jul-2022 |
| 12-Apr-2022 | PENDING | The present complaint was filed on 20.12.2021 and registered as complaint No. 4922 of 2021. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint along with annexures made to the respondent has been submitted by the complainant as available in the file. The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post of which delivery confirmed on 27.12.2021 as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at following email address: virendhar@vatikagroup.com and the same is shown to have been delivered on the above email address as per the report available in the file. It is proper service of the notice. Written reply has not been filed by the respondent till date. The counsel for the respondent requests for a short adjournment for filing of the reply. The respondent is directed to file reply within two weeks i.e. by 30.04.2022 in the registry with a copy to the complainant subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs to be paid to the complainant. This is the last opportunity and in case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defense of the respondent shall be struck off and case shall be proceeded against exparte. Matter to come up on 20.07.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 13-Apr-2022 |
| 02-Feb-2022 | FIRST HEARING | The present complaint was filed on 20.12.2021 and registered as complaint No. 4922 of 2021. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint along with annexures made to the respondent has been submitted by the complainant as available in the file. The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post of which delivery confirmed on 27.12.2021 as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at following email address: virendhar@vatikagroup.com and the same is shown to have been delivered on the above email address as per the report available in the file. It is proper service of the notice. Counsel for the respondent request adjournment for filing reply. Respondent is directed to file reply within two weeks i.e. by 17.02.2022 in the registry with a copy to the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defense of the respondent may struck off. The matter to come up on 12.04.2022 for further proceedings | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 18-Feb-2022 |
| Date of Judgement | Party Details | Judgement Uploading Date | View Judgement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02-Dec-2022 | SONIA MEHTA V/S VATIKA LTD. |
21-Feb-2023 |
|
| Dak ID | Receiving Date | Submitted By | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26935 | 20/12/2021 | ADITYA BHARECH | NEW COMPLAINT |
| 38336 | 21/07/2022 | PANKAJ | REPLY RECEIVED |
Web Information Manager
Shri Arvind Mehtani,Executive Director, HRERA
Mini Secretariat, New Office Block,
2nd & 3rd Floor ,Sector-1,
Panchkula,
Haryana- 134114,India
Email: hrerapkl[dash]hry[at]gov[dot]in
Telephone: +91 172-2584232,2585232
Website Designed and Developed By National Informatics Centre (NIC) and Owned by HRERA PANCHKULA & HRERA GURUGRAM Jointly
© 2018 Copyright. All Rights Reserved.