VATIKA LIMITED
4.0/5
(829 cases analyzed)
- States Active In: Gurugram, Haryana, Rajasthan
| CIN | U74899HR1998PLC054821 |
|---|---|
| Year Established | Not Available |
| Address | Unit No. - A-002, INXT City Centre,Ground Floor, Block -A, Sector -83,Vatika India Next Gurugram Gurgaon HR 122012 IN |
| Company Status | Public |
Overall Case Outcomes
Introduction
When considering a real estate investment, understanding a builder's reputation is crucial. In this blog post, we delve into Vatika Limited, a prominent builder operating in various states, including Gurugram and Rajasthan. With the backdrop of numerous legal complaints, let’s explore the outcomes of these cases to better inform potential buyers.
Overview of Vatika Limited
Number of Complaints: 829 Cases Won: 114 Cases Lost: 715 States with Projects: Gurugram, Haryana, Rajasthan
Analysis of Legal Cases
Cases Lost
Surprisingly, out of 829 complaints, Vatika Limited lost a significant majority, tallying 715 lost cases. An analysis of these lost cases reveals some telling patterns:
- Lack of Jurisdiction Claims: A recurring theme in cases lost includes disputes over jurisdiction, where the adjudicating officer often upheld the authority’s jurisdiction to hear the case.
- Pre-Deposit Failures: Many cases resulted in dismissal due to the builder’s failure to make mandatory pre-deposits required by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act of 2016.
- Issues with Delivering Possession: Numerous cases centered around the inability of the builder to deliver possession of units on time, highlighting a consistent failure in fulfilling promises to buyers.
- Misrepresentation Claims: Some complainants alleged that the builder concealed material facts or misrepresented aspects of the units, which led to dissatisfaction and subsequent legal battles.
- Delayed Projects: A significant number of cases related to projects labeled as abandoned or significantly delayed, causing complainants to seek refunds, clearly indicating issues in project execution.
Cases Won
In stark contrast, Vatika Limited also won 114 cases. A closer look at these successful outcomes suggests the following:
- Withdrawal of Appeals: A notable portion of wins involved complainants withdrawing their appeals, often following settlements, indicating that sometimes issues can be amicably resolved.
- Claims of Non-Entitlement: Many cases were won based on decisions where the Tribunal ruled that complainants were not entitled to the relief sought, often because of contractual stipulations not being met.
- Precedent on Timely Payments: Successful defenses often hinged on claims that the complainants failed to adhere to payment schedules, illustrating a robust agreed-upon contractual obligation that the buyer must uphold.
- Proper Juridical Process: Winning cases frequently involved appeals where the legal processes were correctly followed, validating the adjudicating authority's directions.
- Availability of Legal Framework: The ability of the builder to align their arguments with existing legal frameworks often played a significant role in prevailing in the adjudications.
Conclusion
In summary, Vatika Limited presents a mixed bag of outcomes in their legal history. The high volume of cases lost, particularly revolving around failure to deliver possession and mandatory compliance, suggests potential buyers should tread carefully. These factors should be weighed heavily when making a decision to invest.
Tips for Potential Buyers
- Research Thoroughly: Investigate the builder’s past performance, read reviews, and analyze project deliveries historically.
- Seek Legal Counsel: Engage a real estate lawyer to clarify what should be included in sale agreements and identify any red flags.
- Clarify Delivery Timelines: Always obtain clear and documented timelines for delivery, and be wary of vague timelines that lack binding agreements.
- Understand Your Rights: Familiarize yourself with the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 as it safeguards the rights of buyers.
- Consider Settlement Options: Don’t shy away from negotiation or settlement before the court. Many disputes may be resolved as amicably as possible.
General Tips for Selecting Builders
- Check Registration: Ensure the builder is registered with RERA.
- Review Projects: Examine their completed as well as under-construction projects.
- Look for Transparency: Choose builders that are open about processes and terms.
- Evaluate Financial Stability: A financially sound builder is less likely to put a project at risk.
- Understand Compliance: Ensure the builder adheres to all legal obligations pertaining to projects.
Through diligent research and understanding of the legal landscape, potential buyers can navigate the complexities of real estate transactions with improved confidence.
Cases Lost by Builder (When Defending)
Cases where others sued the builder, and the builder lost. Includes summaries and key takeaways.
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Delayed Possession Claims
Assured Returns and Compensation
Non-Compliance with RERA and Other Regulations
Project Abandonment and Refunds
Disputes over Possession and Allotment
Penalties for Project Delays
Error
This table provides details of individual cases contributing to the summary above. Click rows to expand content. Use "Show More/Less" buttons below.
| Case No. | State | Summary | Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant | Respondent | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 113/2022113/2022 | RajasthanRajasthan | The appellant's counsel could not connect through…The appellant's counsel could not connect through VC due to net connectivity issues, resulting in an ex-parte order. The appeal is allowed, and the matter is remanded back to the Authority for hearing afresh. | ["Violation of prin…["Violation of principles of natural justice"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant's c…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant's counsel could not connect through VC due to net connectivity issues, resulting in an ex-parte order.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not applicable", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal is allowed, and the matter is remanded back to the Authority for hearing afresh.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | lan Christopher Mic…lan Christopher Michael | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 248/2018248/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Ms. Urmila Devi filed a complaint aga…Complainant Ms. Urmila Devi filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not registering the plot in her name despite full payment. The authority directed the respondent to submit a statement on how many cases they had given illegal possession in the plotted colony. | ["Illegal possessio…["Illegal possession", "Non-registration of plot"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not registered the plot in her name despite full payment and had given her illegal possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not the original allottee and had purchased the plot from another person.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to submit a statement on how many cases they had given illegal possession in the plotted colony.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Urmila DeviMs. Urmila Devi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 157 of 2018157 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought possession of a plot and comp…Complainants sought possession of a plot and compensation for delay in a real estate project. Authority directed the respondent to file an affidavit and offer an alternative plot or refund with interest. | ["Real estate posse…["Real estate possession", "Compensation for delay"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought poss…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought possession of a plot and compensation for delay in a real estate project.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they were not in a position to hand over possession due to a change in sector plan and offered to refund the amount with interest.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to file an affidavit giving reasons for not handing over possession and to offer an alternative plot or refund with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Rajbala RanaMrs. Rajbala Rana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 156 of 2018156 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mr. Sandeep Tomar filed a complaint a…Complainant Mr. Sandeep Tomar filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for not delivering possession of a plot despite payment of Rs. 54,89,888/-. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Non-registration of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not deliver possession of the plot despite payment of Rs. 54,89,888/- and sought refund of the amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was not registered with the authority and that the complainant was not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to file an affidavit giving reasons for not handing over possession of the plot and to give an alternative offer of plot to the complainant. The invested amount of the complainant may be refunded alongwith prescribed rate of interest i.e. 10.75% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Sandeep TomarMr. Sandeep Tomar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 412 of 2018412 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mr. Sudhanshu Malhotra filed a compla…Complainant Mr. Sudhanshu Malhotra filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. for not executing a Builder Buyer Agreement (BBA) and for not registering the project with the authority. The authority gave two options to the parties: settle the matter out of court or the builder can forfeit 10% of the earnest money and refund the balance amount. | ["Non-execution of …["Non-execution of BBA", "Non-registration of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not execute a Builder Buyer Agreement (BBA) and did not register the project with the authority.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant did not sign the BBA and did not deposit any amount with the respondent.", "final_verdict": "The authority gave two options to the parties: settle the matter out of court or the builder can forfeit 10% of the earnest money and refund the balance amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Sudhanshu Malho…Mr. Sudhanshu Malhotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 329/2018329/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mr. Rupinder Kalia filed a complaint …Complainant Mr. Rupinder Kalia filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for not developing the project within stipulated period and not executing the builder buyer agreement. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount after forfeiting 10% of the total sales consideration along with prescribed rate of interest. | ["Non-development o…["Non-development of project", "Non-execution of builder buyer agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not develop the project within the stipulated period and did not execute the builder buyer agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant did not make timely payments and that the project was near completion.", "final_verdict": "The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount after forfeiting 10% of the total sales consideration along with prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Rupinder KaliaMr. Rupinder Kalia | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 669/2018669/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Girdhari Lal, filed a complaint …The complainant, Girdhari Lal, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. for not delivering the possession of a plot within the agreed-upon period of 3 years. The authority ordered a refund of the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not deliver the possession of the plot within the agreed-upon period of 3 years and sought a refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that the complainant was aware of the terms and conditions of the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority ordered a refund of the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Girdhari LalGirdhari Lal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 667 of 2018667 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund and compensation for de…Complainant sought refund and compensation for delayed possession of a commercial plot in the 'Vatika Express City' project. The authority ordered refund of the amount paid with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the commercial plot within the agreed-upon timeframe and sought refund of the amount paid with compensation.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was aware of the terms and conditions of the agreement and had not raised any objections until later.", "final_verdict": "The authority ordered refund of the amount paid with interest to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Girdhari LalGirdhari Lal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 358/2018358/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mr. Aditya Sharma filed a complaint a…Complainant Mr. Aditya Sharma filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for not handing over possession of a flat within the stipulated period. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the flat within the stipulated period of three years from the date of execution of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was aware of the change in size of the allotted area and had agreed to accept the change.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Anupama SharmaMrs. Anupama Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 538 of 2018538 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mr. Nitin Garg filed a complaint agai…Complainant Mr. Nitin Garg filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for not handing over possession of a villa in the project 'Vatika India Next' as per the agreement. The authority directed the respondent to not charge more than 10% of the build-up area and to pay delayed possession charges. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Excess charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the villa as per the agreement and charged excess amounts.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was aware of the changes in the project and had agreed to the new terms.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to not charge more than 10% of the build-up area and to pay delayed possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Nitin GargMr. Nitin Garg | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1986 of 20181986 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for delayed real estat…Complainants sought refund for delayed real estate project. Authority ordered refund with interest. | ["Real Estate Proje…["Real Estate Project Delay", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants booked an apartment in the respondent's project, 'Tranquil Heights', in 2014. They paid Rs. 73,13,786/- but the project was delayed. The complainants sought refund with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the project was not delayed and that the complainants were not entitled to a refund. They argued that the complainants had not completed the payment schedule and that the project was not ready for possession.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority ordered the respondent to refund the deposited amount of Rs. 73,13,786/- along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.75% p.a. from the actual date of payment till its realization within 90 days from the date of order.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Dimpy KansalMrs. Dimpy Kansal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2339 of 20182339 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund and compensation for de…Complainant sought refund and compensation for delayed possession of a flat in Vatika India Next project. HARERA directed the respondent to refund the amount deposited with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund and compensation for delayed possession of a flat in Vatika India Next project.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and offered re-allotment or refund with interest.", "final_verdict": "HARERA directed the respondent to refund the amount deposited with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Lalita Ramkris…Mrs. Lalita Ramkrishnan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2066 of 20182066 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for incomplete apartme…Complainants sought refund for incomplete apartment and misrepresentation. Authority ordered refund with deductions and initiated penal proceedings. | ["Refund for incomp…["Refund for incomplete apartment", "Misrepresentation"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants alleged that the respondent had misrepresented the project as a luxury premium project and that the apartment was not complete when possession was offered. They sought refund of their money with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the apartment was complete and that the complainants had refused to pay outstanding dues. They argued that the complaint was frivolous and an abuse of process.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority ordered the respondent to refund the paid amount of the complainants after deducting 10% of the total sales consideration. The authority also initiated penal proceedings against the respondent for not registering the project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Praveen GuptaPraveen Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1445 of 20181445 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Mr. Vikas Mangla and Mrs. Garim…The complainants, Mr. Vikas Mangla and Mrs. Garima Mangla, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not giving possession of their apartment within the agreed-upon time frame. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not give possession of their apartment within the agreed-upon time frame of 3 years from the date of execution of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unavoidable circumstances and that the complainants were aware of the project's development status.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Garima ManglaMrs. Garima Mangla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2860f20192860f2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Mrs. Deepa Yadav filed a complaint ag…Complainant Mrs. Deepa Yadav filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not providing a valid possession letter and delayed possession of a flat. The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest for the delayed period and adjust outstanding dues. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Invalid possession letter"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not provide a valid possession letter and delayed possession of the flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to comply with their part of the obligation and miserably failed to take possession and pay overdue payments.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest for the delayed period and adjust outstanding dues.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Deepa YadavMrs. Deepa Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 764 of 2019764 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount depo…The complainants sought refund of the amount deposited with the respondent for a plot that was not delivered as per the agreement. The respondent was found to be at fault for the delay and the complainants were awarded refund, interest, compensation, and costs. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Unfair contract terms"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the plot despite receiving 49% of the payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to circumstances beyond their control and that the complainants were not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The respondent was found to be at fault for the delay and the complainants were awarded refund, interest, compensation, and costs.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. CharuMrs. Charu | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2806 of 20192806 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Sh. Vikas Birla and Smt. Shashi…The complainants, Sh. Vikas Birla and Smt. Shashi Birla, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to withdraw the termination letter and pay the interest for delayed possession. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Violation of RERA"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had not handed over the possession of the subject apartment within the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of execution of the agreement. They sought relief for delayed possession charges and interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent did not file a reply or appear on the date fixed for hearing. Therefore, the authority had to decide the complaint without their input.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority directed the respondent to withdraw the termination letter and pay the interest for delayed possession. The respondent was also directed to hand over the possession of the new unit allotted to the complainants. The authority ordered the respondent to pay the arrears of interest accrued till the date of decision within 90 days and thereafter monthly payment of interest till the offer of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Shashi BirlaSmt. Shashi Birla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1495 of 20191495 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for delay in possession of the apartment. The authority found the respondent guilty of not handing over the possession within the stipulated period and ordered the payment of interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance of agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the apartment beyond the stipulated period of 3 years.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they had offered the possession of the apartment on time.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent guilty of not handing over the possession within the stipulated period and ordered the payment of interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sh. Tej Singh Manoh…Sh. Tej Singh Manohar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 727 of 2018727 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Sh. Balraj Singh Bhullar and Sm…The complainants, Sh. Balraj Singh Bhullar and Smt. Simmi Bhullar, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority found that the respondent was in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainants. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Non-compliance of builder buyer's agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had not handed over the possession of the subject apartment within the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of signing of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had not paid the outstanding interest amount and that the possession had not been handed over due to non-payment of dues.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondent was in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Simmi BhullarSmt. Simmi Bhullar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2029 of 20192029 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Smt. Poonam Yadav, filed a compl…The complainant, Smt. Poonam Yadav, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not handing over the possession of a residential apartment within the stipulated period. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) passed an order directing the respondent to pay interest on the delayed possession and to register the project. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Project Registration"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of execution of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was responsible for the delay and that the project was not registered with the authorities.", "final_verdict": "The HRERA passed an order directing the respondent to pay interest on the delayed possession and to register the project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Poonam YadavSmt. Poonam Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2350 of 20192350 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondents for not handing over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period. The authority held that the respondents were in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed them to pay interest on the delayed possession. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Interest on Delayed Possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondents did not hand over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of signing of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they were not responsible for the delay.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondents were in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed them to pay interest on the delayed possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Niloufer PatkarSmt. Niloufer Patkar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 85 of 202085 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Vikram Yadav, filed a complaint …The complainant, Vikram Yadav, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for delay in possession of a residential plot. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed an order directing the respondent to pay interest and hand over possession of the unit. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-registration of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had delayed possession of the residential plot and sought relief for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not file a reply or appear before the authority.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed an order directing the respondent to pay interest and hand over possession of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vikram YadavVikram Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1158 of 20191158 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought relief for delayed possession …Complainant sought relief for delayed possession of a villa by the respondent. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act and passed an order for payment of interest on the delayed possession. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought relief for delayed possession of a villa by the respondent. The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the allotted villa within the stipulated period of 3 years from the date of signing of the agreement.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to comply with their part of the obligation and miserably failed to pay the instalments on time despite repeated payment reminders being sent by the promoter company.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act for failing to deliver the possession of the villa within the stipulated period. The authority passed an order for payment of interest on the delayed possession at the rate of 9.30% per annum for every month of delay.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Sachin MinochaShri Sachin Minocha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4010 of 20194010 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for delay in possession of a flat and non-execution of the conveyance deed. The authority held that the respondent was in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed within 15 days. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the flat and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons and that the conveyance deed was not executed due to non-payment of dues.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent was in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed within 15 days.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Raj Kumar SinghalRaj Kumar Singhal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6028 of 20196028 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Smt. Ashima Ahlawat, filed a com…The complainant, Smt. Ashima Ahlawat, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority ordered the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant. | ["Violation of sect…["Violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent violated section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by not being responsible for all obligations, responsibilities, and functions to the allottee as per the agreement for sale.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had followed all the necessary procedures and laws.", "final_verdict": "The authority ordered the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Ashima AhlawatSmt. Ashima Ahlawat | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6007 of 20196007 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Smt. Ashima Ahlawat, filed a com…The complainant, Smt. Ashima Ahlawat, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violating the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed directions for payment of interest and registration of the project. | ["Real Estate", "Pr…["Real Estate", "Project Registration"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had violated the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by not getting the project registered and by not providing a possession clause in the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had followed all the necessary procedures and regulations.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed directions for payment of interest and registration of the project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Ashima AhlawatSmt. Ashima Ahlawat | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 790 of 2020790 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges a…The complainant sought delay possession charges at the rate of 18% p.a. however, the Authority awarded interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay possession charges at the rate of 18% p.a.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent argued that the complainant is seeking delay possession charges at an incorrect rate.", "final_verdict": "The Authority awarded interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Manish KumarShri Manish Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 948 of 2019948 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought possession of a unit and …The complainants sought possession of a unit and compensation for delay. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Non-compliance with Act"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the unit within the stipulated period and sought compensation for the delay.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had stopped making payments after September 2011 and that the possession was to be handed over by 2014.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Saurabh SadhShri Saurabh Sadh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3710 of 20203710 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against M/s Vat…The complainant filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Interest Payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the booked unit within the prescribed period of 48 months and sought interest payment for the delayed period.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not respond to the complaint and was not present on the date of hearing.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Dinesh Chandra…Shri Dinesh Chandra Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4538 of 20204538 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delayed possess…The complainant sought relief for delayed possession of a flat and compensation for the same. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Compensation"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the flat within the promised date of 04.12.2015 and sought compensation for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control and sought to dismiss the complaint.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Ravinder PundeShri Ravinder Punde | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4542 of 20204542 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought possession of an apartment…The complainant sought possession of an apartment and compensation for delay. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought posse…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought possession of an apartment and compensation for delay.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Ravinder PundeShri Ravinder Punde | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1418 of 20191418 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought possession of flat and compens…Complainant sought possession of flat and compensation for delay. Authority directed payment of interest at 9.30% p.a. for delayed possession. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possessio…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possession of flat and compensation for delay.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that project was 95% complete and possession would be given soon.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed payment of interest at 9.30% p.a. for delayed possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Mohammad YousufShri Mohammad Yousuf | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2444 of 20192444 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges f…The complainant sought delay possession charges for a plot in the Vatika India Next project. The authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the provisions of the Act and ordered the payment of interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with Act"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the plot within the stipulated period and sought delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had agreed to waive his right to compensation for delay in handing over possession.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the provisions of the Act and ordered the payment of interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vijay WadhwaVijay Wadhwa | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5550 of 20195550 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought delay possession charges …The complainants sought delay possession charges at 18% p.a. but the authority awarded 9.30% p.a. The respondent was directed to pay interest and adjust amounts. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest rates"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed del…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed delay possession charges at 18% p.a. for the period from 21.01.2013 to the date of possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had not paid the full sale consideration and had defaulted on payments.", "final_verdict": "The authority awarded 9.30% p.a. interest rates and directed the respondent to pay interest and adjust amounts.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Vikramaditya M…Shri Vikramaditya Mathur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 8510f20198510f2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges a…The complainant sought delay possession charges and interest for the delayed period. The authority held that the respondent is in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay possession …["Delay possession charges", "Interest for delayed period"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay possession charges and interest for the delayed period.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not in default and that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent is in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. KrishnaSmt. Krishna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 592 of 2019592 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of Rs 21,92,701 with i…Complainants sought refund of Rs 21,92,701 with interest for a flat booked in an unregistered project. The Adjudicating Officer directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest and costs. | ["Refund for unregi…["Refund for unregistered real estate project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed the…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed they had paid Rs 21,92,701 for a flat in an unregistered project and sought refund with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed the project was ongoing and not registered with RERA at the time of the complaint. They also claimed the complainants had not executed a buyer's agreement and had not accepted an offer of an alternative flat.", "final_verdict": "The Adjudicating Officer directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs 21,92,701 with interest @ 9.3% p.a. from the date of receipt till realization of amount, and to pay costs of Rs.50,000/- to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rashmi SoniRashmi Soni | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/880/2020CR/880/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Uma Vashistha vs Vatika Limited: Complaint settle…Uma Vashistha vs Vatika Limited: Complaint settled between parties, disposed of. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint settled between parties", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Uma VashisthaUma Vashistha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2065 of 20182065 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Abhishek Gupta and Praveen Gupt…The complainants, Abhishek Gupta and Praveen Gupta, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not completing the construction of their apartment and for not refunding their money. The adjudicating officer directed Vatika Limited to refund the amount received from the complainants after deducting 10% of the total sale consideration and to pay interest @ 10.20% p.a. on the amount of refund. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of construction", "Non-refund of money"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not complete the construction of their apartment and did not refund their money despite repeated requests.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants did not make the balance payment and therefore, the termination of the agreement was justified.", "final_verdict": "The adjudicating officer directed the respondent to refund the amount received from the complainants after deducting 10% of the total sale consideration and to pay interest @ 10.20% p.a. on the amount of refund.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Praveen GuptaPraveen Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2752 of 20202752 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought relief for delay in possessio…Complainants sought relief for delay in possession of a commercial unit by the respondent, Vatika Limited. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with Act"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the commercial unit and sought relief for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not in default and that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and directed payment of interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kiran YadavKiran Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1076 of 20201076 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delayed posses…The complainants sought relief for delayed possession of a plot in a housing project developed by the respondent. The authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the provisions of the Real Estate Act and ordered the payment of delayed possession charges. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Non-Compliance with Real Estate Act"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the plot within the stipulated period and sought relief for delayed possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to relief as they had not paid the full amount due to the respondent.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the provisions of the Real Estate Act and ordered the payment of delayed possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Reena SahuSmt. Reena Sahu | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3835/20203835/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund of Rs. 1,32,32,784/- al…Complainant sought refund of Rs. 1,32,32,784/- along with interest and compensation for delayed possession of residential unit. Adjudicating Officer directed refund of amount with interest and cost of litigation. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that res…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that respondent failed to deliver possession of residential unit within 48 months of agreement and sought refund of amount paid along with interest and compensation.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that delay was due to various reasons including litigation, acquisition of land, and disruption in supply of construction materials.", "final_verdict": "Adjudicating Officer directed respondent to refund amount paid by complainant with interest and cost of litigation.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Jawahar Lal SehgalJawahar Lal Sehgal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1513 of 20211513 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Praveen Pahuja and Subhash Chan…The complainants, Praveen Pahuja and Subhash Chand Pahuja, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not delivering possession of a unit in their project, 'Tranquil Heights', despite receiving payment. The adjudicating officer directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest and litigation costs. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid Rs 68,28,052 for a unit in the respondent's project, 'Tranquil Heights', but the respondent had not delivered possession of the unit despite the agreed-upon date of possession being 30.07.2019.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to various reasons, including the laying of a gas pipeline, acquisition of land by HUDA, shortage of labour supply, and orders passed by the NGT and Environment Pollution Control Authority.", "final_verdict": "The adjudicating officer directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest and litigation costs.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Subhash Chand PahujaSubhash Chand Pahuja | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1509 of 20211509 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for delayed possession…Complainants sought refund for delayed possession of a flat. Authority allowed the complaint, directing the respondent to refund the amount with interest and litigation costs. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants booked a flat in the respondent's project 'Tranquil Heights' in 2013 and paid Rs 6,00,000 as a booking amount. They alleged that the respondent failed to complete the construction work and deliver possession of the flat within the agreed-upon time frame of 48 months.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the agreement was executed before the implementation of the Real Estate Act, 2016, and that the complainants had not made timely payments. They attributed the delay to various factors, including legal issues, environmental concerns, and supply chain disruptions.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The Authority allowed the complaint, directing the respondent to refund the amount of Rs 68,27,810 paid by the complainants, along with interest at the rate of 9.3% per annum and litigation costs of Rs 50,000.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rashmi SugandhRashmi Sugandh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 264 of 2019264 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for not handing over possession of the flat within the stipulated time period. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for the delay. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the flat within the stipulated time period of 3 years.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they had completed the construction of the flat in the first quarter of 2017.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for the delay.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Anita KumarSmt. Anita Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 617 of 2020617 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief against the respon…The complainants sought relief against the respondents for non-payment of assured returns and unilateral changes to the builder-buyer agreement. The authority directed the respondents to pay the arrears of assured return to the complainants. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Unilateral changes to builder-buyer agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondents had not paid the assured returns as per the builder-buyer agreement and had unilaterally changed the terms and conditions of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainants had not returned the signed agreement and had concealed this fact in the complaint.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay the arrears of assured return to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Tanuja KrishnatrayTanuja Krishnatray | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4277 of 20204277 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant alleged that the respondent faile…The complainant alleged that the respondent failed to deliver possession of a plot and register it in their name despite full payment. The respondent claimed that the complainant had taken possession of the plot and was not entitled to further relief. | ["Failure to delive…["Failure to deliver possession", "Failure to register plot"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant a…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant alleged that they had paid full consideration for a plot of land in the Vatika India Next project, but the respondent failed to deliver possession of the plot and register it in their name. The complainant claimed that they had made payments on time and had not defaulted on any payments.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had taken possession of the plot on 01.07.2017 and was not entitled to further relief. The respondent argued that the complainant had waived their right to claim any variations in the size, dimension, area, location, or legal status of the plot.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority found that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the plot and register it in the complainant's name despite full payment. The authority directed the respondent to submit the circumstances under which the possession was offered without part completion certificate/completion certificate. The authority also directed the respondent to take action to complete the remaining work and hand over the possession of the plot to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Satya Priya SinghSatya Priya Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 142 of 2021142 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Mr. Arvind Garg, filed a complai…The complainant, Mr. Arvind Garg, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not delivering possession of a flat despite paying more than 30% of the total consideration. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that despite paying more than 30% of the total consideration, the respondent did not deliver possession of the flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was a subsequent allottee and that the period for calculating the date of handing over of possession had to be done from the date of endorsement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Arvind GargMr. Arvind Garg | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 486 of 2021486 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority held that the respondent was liable for delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the flat within the stipulated period and sought compensation for the delay.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had failed to make payments in time and that the delay in possession was due to the complainants' fault.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent was liable for delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vaishali ChandokVaishali Chandok | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 916 of 2021916 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a unit in a real estate project developed by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the unit and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to pay the instalments in time and sought termination of the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ramesh ThakranRamesh Thakran | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 37260f202137260f2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought possession of flat and compens…Complainant sought possession of flat and compensation for delay. Authority found offer of possession invalid and disposed of complaint. | ["Invalid offer of …["Invalid offer of possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possessio…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possession of flat and compensation for delay.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed offer of possession was valid and complainant was at fault for delay.", "final_verdict": "Authority found offer of possession invalid and disposed of complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neeta MongaNeeta Monga | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4373 of 20204373 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for not paying the assured return as per the agreement. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return and comply with the agreement. | ["Assured Return", …["Assured Return", "Non-Payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not pay the assured return as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return was not payable as per the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return and comply with the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Om Prakash NagpalOm Prakash Nagpal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 442 of 2021442 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Smt. Sonali Saxena, filed a comp…The complainant, Smt. Sonali Saxena, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority held that the respondent is liable to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession ie. 13.08.2013 till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of obligations by the promoter", "Delay in handing over possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the construction of the building and hand over the possession of the unit within the stipulated time.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to the assured returns as the project was not registered with RERA.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent is liable to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession ie. 13.08.2013 till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Sonali SaxenaSmt. Sonali Saxena | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1239 of 20211239 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Madhushree Khaitan, filed a comp…The complainant, Madhushree Khaitan, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return as agreed upon with the complainant from October 2018 till the date of handing over possession. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay the assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable as per the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return as agreed upon with the complainant from October 2018 till the date of handing over possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Madhushree KhaitanMadhushree Khaitan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 443 of 2021443 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant. | ["Real Estate", "Re…["Real Estate", "Regulation", "Development"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to timely construct and handover the possession of the unit, and did not pay the assured return as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee, but an investor, and that the assured return was not payable.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Mahesh Chandra…Shri Mahesh Chandra Saxena | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1262 of 20211262 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought relief for delay in possession…Complainant sought relief for delay in possession of commercial unit and non-payment of assured returns. Authority directed payment of delayed possession charges and assured returns. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed delay in…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed delay in possession of commercial unit and non-payment of assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns as the scheme was illegal.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed payment of delayed possession charges and assured returns.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Abhinav KothiwalAbhinav Kothiwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1205 of 20211205 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed directions to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter. | ["Violation of sect…["Violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to comply with the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and the Rules made thereunder.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had complied with the provisions of the Act and the Rules.", "final_verdict": "The authority found the respondent in contravention of the provisions of the Act and passed directions to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Sangeeta Agarw…Mrs. Sangeeta Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 831 of 2019831 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a case against M/s Vatika L…The complainant filed a case against M/s Vatika Limited for non-payment of assured returns. The authority directed the respondents to pay the amount of assured returns as agreed upon. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents did not pay the amount of assured returns as agreed upon.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that they had paid the amount of assured returns till September 2018 and that the assured return is not payable after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into force.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay the amount of assured returns as agreed upon.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Rajesh MalhotraShri Rajesh Malhotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 633 of 2021633 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Prateek Srivastava and Namita M…The complainants, Prateek Srivastava and Namita Mehta, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return as agreed upon with the complainants from October 2018 till the date of handing over possession. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay the assured returns as per the agreement dated 16.12.2016.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable as per the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return as agreed upon with the complainants from October 2018 till the date of handing over possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Namita MehtaNamita Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2071 of 20212071 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for non-payment of …The complainant sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondent, a real estate developer. The authority held that the respondent was liable to pay assured returns at the agreed rate and directed them to do so. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not paid assured returns at the agreed rate of Rs. 71.50/- per sq. ft. per month from October 2018 till the date of offer of possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had paid assured returns at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq. ft. per month from March 2018 till September 2018 and that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns at the higher rate.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent was liable to pay assured returns at the agreed rate of Rs. 71.50/- per sq. ft. per month from October 2018 till the date of offer of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sneh SharmaSneh Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 12120f 202112120f 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought payment of assured rental …The complainant sought payment of assured rental and delay possession charges from the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% per annum for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant. | ["Delay possession …["Delay possession charges", "Assured rental"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought payme…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought payment of assured rental and delay possession charges from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal and that they had not taken registration from SEBI Board.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% per annum for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession of the allotted unit to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Vinod AgarwalMr. Vinod Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3810 of 20203810 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delayed posses…The complainants sought relief for delayed possession and non-payment of assured returns by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to give possession and pay assured returns. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed possession of their commercial unit and did not pay assured returns as agreed upon.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to assured returns as the project was not completed within the agreed-upon timeframe.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to give possession to the complainants and pay assured returns as agreed upon.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Mitlesh GuptaMrs. Mitlesh Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1155 of 20211155 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for not paying assured returns and delayed possession of a commercial unit. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns and delayed possession charges. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns and delayed possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns and delayed possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was banned by the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns and delayed possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Sangeeta Agarw…Mrs. Sangeeta Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3942 of 20203942 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for non-payment of…The complainants sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured returns and give possession of the property. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay the amount of assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the payment of assured returns was not their liability.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured returns and give possession of the property.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Nisha ChhikaraMrs. Nisha Chhikara | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4371 of 20204371 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Harshit Nagpal, filed a complain…The complainant, Harshit Nagpal, filed a complaint against Vatika One on One Pvt. Ltd. and Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondents to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession. | ["Real Estate", "De…["Real Estate", "Delayed Possession", "Assured Returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents failed to hand over possession of the commercial unit within the stipulated period of 48 months and also failed to pay assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns as the project was not registered with the authority and the agreement was not in compliance with the regulations.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 9.30% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession till the date of handing over possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Harshit NagpalHarshit Nagpal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 622 of 2021622 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for not paying assured returns and for cancelling the unit. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns and not to cancel the unit. | ["Assured returns",…["Assured returns", "Cancellation of unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns and cancelled the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable as per the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns and not to cancel the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Namita MehtaNamita Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1665 of 20211665 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Anita Ahlawat and Mansi Ahlawat…The complainants, Anita Ahlawat and Mansi Ahlawat, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession of a commercial unit. The authority held that the respondent is liable to pay assured returns at the agreed rate and delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and delay in possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal and not liable to pay.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent is liable to pay assured returns at the agreed rate and delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mansi AhlawatMansi Ahlawat | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 55515551 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought possession of their comme…The complainants sought possession of their commercial unit and delayed possession charges from the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return to the complainants. | ["Assured Return", …["Assured Return", "Delayed Possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought poss…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought possession of their commercial unit and delayed possession charges from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to delayed possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Tushar DewanShri Tushar Dewan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| E/4439/2020/2066/018E/4439/2020/2066/018 | HaryanaHaryana | The case is related to a real estate dispute betw…The case is related to a real estate dispute between Abhishek Gupta and Vatika Limited. The JD has paid a sum of Rs. 55,06,280/- on different dates against the total payment of Rs. 61,06,997/- (inclusive interest). | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the JD has not paid the correct amount to the decree holder.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the JD has paid the correct amount to the decree holder.", "final_verdict": "The case is disposed of, and the JD is directed to pay the balance amount, if any, within 15 days.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Abhishek GuptaAbhishek Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5077 of 20215077 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought assured returns and possession…Complainant sought assured returns and possession of unit, authority directed respondent to pay arrears and execute conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Possession of Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought assured r…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought assured returns and possession of unit.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent contested the complaint, arguing that assured return schemes are illegal and that the complainant is not an allottee but an investor.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed respondent to pay arrears of assured returns and execute conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Hanita KaushalHanita Kaushal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3582 of 20213582 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for non-payment of…The complainants sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondent, a real estate developer. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns at the agreed rate and outstanding accrued assured return amount. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they paid assured returns up to September 2018 and stopped due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns at the agreed rate and outstanding accrued assured return amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anil WadhwaAnil Wadhwa | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 700 of 2021700 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for non-payment of …The complainant sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq.ft. till completion of the building. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not paid the assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had paid the assured returns till September 2018 and that the complainant was not entitled to further payments.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq.ft. till completion of the building.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Meenakshi KumarMeenakshi Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4123 of 20204123 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for not handing over possession of the apartment within the stipulated time and for not obtaining the occupation certificate. The authority held that the respondent was liable for not handing over possession within the stipulated time and for not obtaining the occupation certificate. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Non-obtaining of occupation certificate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the apartment within the stipulated time and did not obtain the occupation certificate.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were aware of the terms and conditions of the agreement and that the delay in possession was due to external circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent was liable for not handing over possession within the stipulated time and for not obtaining the occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neeta JhaNeeta Jha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3884 of 20203884 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Mr. Tarun Bhargava and Ms. Vand…The complainants, Mr. Tarun Bhargava and Ms. Vandana Bhargava, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not obtaining the occupation certificate (OC) before handing over possession of their apartment. The authority directed the respondent to obtain the OC and transfer the title in favor of the complainants. | ["Non-issuance of o…["Non-issuance of occupation certificate", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not obtain the occupation certificate (OC) before handing over possession of their apartment, which is a mandatory requirement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants voluntarily took possession of the apartment and that the OC was not required.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to obtain the OC and transfer the title in favor of the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Vandana BhargavaMs. Vandana Bhargava | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4588 of 20204588 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges a…The complainant sought delay possession charges and registration of conveyance deed after the respondent offered possession without obtaining occupation certificate. The authority directed the respondent to arrange execution of conveyance deed within 3 months after receiving occupation certificate and transfer title to the association of allottees. | ["Delay possession …["Delay possession charges", "Registration of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought delay possession charges and registration of conveyance deed after the respondent offered possession without obtaining occupation certificate.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had waived off her rights to claim interest for delay in handing over possession.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to arrange execution of conveyance deed within 3 months after receiving occupation certificate and transfer title to the association of allottees.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. RadhikaMs. Radhika | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 725 of 2020725 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 38,90,893/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 38,90,893/- and compensation for non-delivery of the flat by the respondents. The Authority directed the respondents to return the balance amount after deducting 10% of the sale consideration. | ["Non-delivery of f…["Non-delivery of flat", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents did not deliver the flat despite receiving the full payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainant did not make timely payments and therefore, the cancellation of the flat was valid.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondents to return the balance amount after deducting 10% of the sale consideration.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shipra GuptaShipra Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| cr/1512/2022cr/1512/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Sunita Devi and Ashok Yadav vs Vatika Limited. Th…Sunita Devi and Ashok Yadav vs Vatika Limited. The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement deed dated 29.06.2022 has been filed. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement deed dated 29.06.2022 has been filed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ashok YadavAshok Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1520 of 20211520 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a case against the responde…The complainant filed a case against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return amount and delay possession charges. | ["Assured returns",…["Assured returns", "Delay possession charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and delay possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return amount and delay possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Priti KhemkaPriti Khemka | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5156-20215156-2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and delay …The complainant sought assured returns and delay possession charges from the respondent for a commercial unit in the Vatika India 4 project. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq.ft. per month from July 2018 till the date of completion of the building. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Delay Possession Charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to pay assured returns and delay possession charges for the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and delay possession charges as the project was not registered with RERA.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns at the rate of Rs. 65/- per sq.ft. per month from July 2018 till the date of completion of the building.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sh. Ravinder Wadhaw…Sh. Ravinder Wadhawan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1242 of 20211242 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for non-payment of …The complainant sought relief for non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession of a commercial unit. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and complete the sale deed within 3 months. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not pay the assured returns as per the agreement and delayed the possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they paid the assured returns till June 2018 and that the complainant was not entitled to the same after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into effect.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and complete the sale deed within 3 months.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Harbinder Singh…Mr. Harbinder Singh Dhanjal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3417 of 20203417 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought delay interest, occupation ce…Complainants sought delay interest, occupation certificate, and conveyance deed. Authority directed the respondent to obtain occupation certificate, execute conveyance deed, and transfer title within specified periods. | ["Delay interest", …["Delay interest", "Occupation certificate", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed delay i…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed delay in possession, non-execution of conveyance deed, and non-issuance of occupation certificate.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that possession was given, and conveyance deed was ready for execution.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed the respondent to obtain occupation certificate, execute conveyance deed, and transfer title within specified periods.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Dr. Rieta MittalDr. Rieta Mittal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3438 of 20203438 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority passed an order directing the respondent to register the conveyance deed and transfer title in favour of the complainants upon receipt of occupation certificate. | ["Violation of sect…["Violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had violated section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by not registering the conveyance deed and transferring title in their favour.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had complied with all the requirements of the Act and that the complainants were not entitled to the relief sought.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to register the conveyance deed and transfer title in favour of the complainants upon receipt of occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Manita KyalManita Kyal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6238 of 20196238 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a residential plot in the …The complainant booked a residential plot in the project of the respondent for a total sale consideration of Rs. 74,65,500/- and the said plot was allotted to the complainant vide allotment letter dated 14.11.2014. The complainant was paid Rs. 74,65,500/- to the respondent against the total sale consideration. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the plot on time and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not file any reply despite being given opportunities.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant along with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ramesh ChandRamesh Chand | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6257 of 20196257 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the project of t…The complainant booked a unit in the project of the respondent for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,50,30,540/- and a plot was allotted to the complainant vide allotment letter dated 14.11.2014. The complainant paid Rs. 1,50,30,540/- to the respondent against the total sale consideration. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the plot on time and demanded refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not file any reply in the stipulated period.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 1,50,30,540/- paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 9.70% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ramesh ChandRamesh Chand | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4785 of 20204785 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 31,25,914/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 31,25,914/- paid to the respondent for a residential apartment, along with interest and compensation for delay in possession. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest and compensation. | ["Refund for delay …["Refund for delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the construction and handover possession of the apartment within the stipulated period, and sought refund of the amount paid, along with interest and compensation.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including delay in payment by the complainant and impact of the NGT notification and COVID-19 pandemic.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 31,25,914/- with interest at the rate of 9.70% p.a. from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sachin MehrotraSachin Mehrotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3591 of 20213591 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Promila Mehra, filed a complaint…The complainant, Promila Mehra, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for delay in possession of a residential unit. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the residential unit and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control, including force majeure events.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Promila MehraPromila Mehra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4711 of 20204711 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid amount …The complainant sought refund of the paid amount along with interest and compensation for financial loss due to loss of working hours and mental harassment. The authority directed the respondent to forfeit earnest money not exceeding 10% of the sale price and return the balance amount to the complainant. | ["Refund of paid am…["Refund of paid amount", "Compensation for financial loss"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat within the stipulated time period and sought refund of the paid amount along with interest and compensation for financial loss due to loss of working hours and mental harassment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond its control and that the complainant had failed to make payments on time.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to forfeit earnest money not exceeding 10% of the sale price and return the balance amount to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Krishan Chand JainKrishan Chand Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1661 of 20191661 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for a unit in the 'Tra…Complainants sought refund for a unit in the 'Tranquil Heights' project due to non-compliance with agreements and lack of necessary approvals. | ["Non-compliance wi…["Non-compliance with agreements", "Lack of necessary approvals"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not comply with the agreements and lacked necessary approvals for the project.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complaint was premature and that the complainants had not approached the authority with clean hands.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount after forfeiting 10% of the basic sale price of the unit, along with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shikha GuptaShikha Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2229 of 20212229 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant seeks refund for delayed possession o…Complainant seeks refund for delayed possession of apartment. Authority directs refund with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant seeks refund for…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant seeks refund for delayed possession of apartment.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claims delay due to various reasons, including force majeure.", "final_verdict": "Authority directs refund with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Alka JainSmt. Alka Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5363 of 20195363 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a unit in the project of …The complainants booked a unit in the project of the respondent for a total sale consideration of Rs. 88,22,313/- out of which they have made a payment of Rs. 27,11,833/- against the total consideration. The respondent assured the complainant to handover the said unit within 3 years from the date of execution of buyers’ agreement. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "False demand"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent assured them to handover the said unit within 3 years from the date of execution of buyers\u2019 agreement. However, the respondent failed to do so and raised false demand against given payment plan.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants failed to make payments in time in accordance with the terms and conditions as well as payment plan annexed with the buyers\u2019 agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 27,11,833/- paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 9.80% p.a. as prescribed under rule 15 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development Rules, 2017) from the date of each payment till the actual date of realization of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajesh MarwahRajesh Marwah | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2717 of 20212717 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Satish Chopra, filed a complaint…The complainant, Satish Chopra, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violating the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount to the complainant and his co-allottee in equal shares after forfeiting 10% of the basic sale price of the unit. | ["Real Estate", "Re…["Real Estate", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had violated the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by forfeiting an amount of Rs. 13,80,717/- from the total amount of Rs. 19,67,000/- paid by the complainant and his co-allottee.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the forfeiture of the amount was as per the agreement between the parties and that the complainant had failed to make payments as per the agreed payment plan.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount to the complainant and his co-allottee in equal shares after forfeiting 10% of the basic sale price of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Satish ChopraSatish Chopra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| cr/1123/2019cr/1123/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Dinesh Kumar vs Vatika Limited: The parties have …Dinesh Kumar vs Vatika Limited: The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a settlement deed dated 26.04.2022 has been placed on the record. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The present complaint stands disposed off in view of the settlement deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Dinesh KumarDinesh Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/610/2020CR/610/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn by complainant as matter sett…Complaint withdrawn by complainant as matter settled between parties. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint withdrawn by complainant as matter settled between parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sourabh KumarSourabh Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3602 of 20213602 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of Rs. 9,48,714/- …The complainants sought refund of Rs. 9,48,714/- with interest and compensation for mental harassment caused to them. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the rate of 9.80%. | ["Refund", "Compens…["Refund", "Compensation"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they were allotted a unit by the respondent, but the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession. They sought refund of the amount paid with interest and compensation for mental harassment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had terminated the agreement due to various reasons, including change in the layout plan and non-removal of defunct High Tension lines.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the rate of 9.80%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ritu ChandelRitu Chandel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 808 of 2021808 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid to the respondent for a delayed real estate project. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest and compensation for mental agony and harassment. | ["Delayed real esta…["Delayed real estate project", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the apartment within the stipulated time and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including force majeure circumstances, and sought to avoid refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest and compensation for mental agony and harassment.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mukul KumarMukul Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 935 of 2021935 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a unit in the project 'Tr…The complainants booked a unit in the project 'Tranquil Heights' and paid Rs. 69,49,019/-. The promoter failed to complete or give possession of the unit within the stipulated time. The authority directed the promoter to return the amount with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the promoter failed to complete or give possession of the unit within the stipulated time and sought refund of the amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including force majeure circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the promoter to return the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Jyoti MehrotraJyoti Mehrotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1253 of 20211253 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 37,14,883/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 37,14,883/- paid by him to the respondent for a delayed project. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest. | ["Delayed Project",…["Delayed Project", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed the project and sought refund of Rs. 37,14,883/- paid by him.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that the project was completed later.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Suresh Chander GuptaSuresh Chander Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1122 of 20191122 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him along with interest @24% p.a. as he does not want any association with the respondent. The respondent was directed to refund the amount after deducting 10% of the basic sale consideration of the unit being earnest money. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Earnest money"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him along with interest @24% p.a. as he does not want any association with the respondent.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent contested the complaint by stating that the complainant is trying to shift his onus of failure on the respondent and that the delay in handing over of the possession is due to reasons beyond the control of the respondent.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The respondent was directed to refund the amount after deducting 10% of the basic sale consideration of the unit being earnest money.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Arvind ChadhaArvind Chadha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 105 of 2022105 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Lokesh Varshney, filed a complai…The complainant, Lokesh Varshney, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not handing over possession of a unit, seeking assured returns, and execution of a conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and hand over possession. | Non-handover of pos…Non-handover of possession, assured returns, and conveyance deed | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the unit, did not pay assured returns, and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and that the possession was handed over as per the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and hand over possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Lokesh VarshneyLokesh Varshney | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/105/2022CR/105/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Lokesh Varshney, filed a complai…The complainant, Lokesh Varshney, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not handing over possession of a unit, seeking assured returns, and execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and hand over possession. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Assured returns", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the unit, sought assured returns, and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and that the possession was handed over as per the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and hand over possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Lokesh VarshneyLokesh Varshney | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2252 of 20192252 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Shri Pravin Goel, filed a compla…The complainant, Shri Pravin Goel, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not handing over the possession of a plot within the stipulated period. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) found the respondent guilty of not complying with the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. | Non-handover of pos…Non-handover of possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over the possession of the plot within the stipulated period of 3 years.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was seeking compensation along with physical possession and interest.", "final_verdict": "The HRERA found the respondent guilty of not complying with the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Pravin GoelShri Pravin Goel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3870/2021CR/3870/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delayed posses…The complainants sought relief for delayed possession charges, assured return, and execution of conveyance deeds. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Assured Return", "Conveyance Deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the commercial unit on time, did not pay assured returns, and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to assured returns as the scheme was illegal, and that the conveyance deed could not be executed without the occupation certificate.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anr.Anr. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2013 of 20192013 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a residential plot in Vati…The complainant booked a residential plot in Vatika India Next and sought refund for cancellation. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | ["Refund for cancel…["Refund for cancellation", "Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant b…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant booked a residential plot in Vatika India Next and sought refund for cancellation. He alleged that the respondent had misappropriated the refund amount and sought compensation.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had not paid the full amount due and had cancelled the booking unilaterally. They sought to recover the outstanding amount.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount of Rs. 47,42,018/- after deducting 10% of the earnest money and 0.5% brokerage charges. The complainant was also entitled to interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sudhir GargSudhir Garg | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4779 of 20214779 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Suresh Kumar Yadav, filed a comp…The complainant, Suresh Kumar Yadav, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority found that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.25% per annum for every month of delay. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and sought delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control, including changes in building plans, acquisition of land by HUDA, and disruptions in the supply of stone and sand aggregate.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.25% per annum for every month of delay.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Suresh Kumar YadavSuresh Kumar Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 35200f202135200f2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant filed case against M/s Vatika Limited…Complainant filed case against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Authority directed respondent to pay interest at prescribed rate for every month of delay from due date of possession till actual taking over of possession. | ["Violation of sect…["Violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that res…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that respondent failed to hand over possession of the unit by the due date as per the agreement and demanded compensation for the delay.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that the complainant had accepted the offer of possession and taken possession of the unit on 06.05.2016, and therefore, the delay in handover of possession was not their fault.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.25% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession till actual taking over of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Atul Kumar VermaAtul Kumar Verma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4261 of 20204261 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought direction for execution of con…Complainant sought direction for execution of conveyance deed and payment of delay possession charges. Authority directed execution of conveyance deed within 2 months. | ["Conveyance Deed",…["Conveyance Deed", "Delay Possession Charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought direction…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought direction for execution of conveyance deed and payment of delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent contested the complaint, alleging that complainant had waived off his rights to claim interest for delay in handing over of possession.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed execution of conveyance deed within 2 months.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ainul IslamAinul Islam | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 951 of 2022951 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for delayed possession…Complainants sought refund for delayed possession of flat. Authority directed refund with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed refund …{"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed refund for delayed possession of flat.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed delay due to unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Karun Krishan ThaperKarun Krishan Thaper | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2848 of 20212848 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 37,19,902/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 37,19,902/- with interest for delay in possession of a residential unit. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at 10.25% p.a. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession of the unit within the stipulated time period.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances such as demonetization, shortage of labour, and various orders passed by NGT.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at 10.25% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sonia MahajanSonia Mahajan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1442/2021CR/1442/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Manika Gupta vs Vatika Ltd. - The parties have ar…Manika Gupta vs Vatika Ltd. - The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a settlement agreement has been placed on record. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Manika GuptaManika Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3454 of 20203454 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest from the respondent for a delayed project. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Delayed Project",…["Delayed Project", "Refund of Paid-Up Amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the project as per the schedule and sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including force majeure events, and sought to avoid refunding the amount.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Puneet GuptaPuneet Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1738 of 20221738 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for unpaid flat in Guru…Complainant sought refund for unpaid flat in Gurugram. Authority directed refund with 10.25% interest. | ["Refund for unpaid…["Refund for unpaid flat"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund fo…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund for unpaid flat in Gurugram.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that complainant had not made timely payments.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund with 10.25% interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Gunnet BhinderGunnet Bhinder | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1146 of 20211146 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a unit in the project 'Va…The complainants booked a unit in the project 'Vatika Express City' and paid a sum of Rs. 20,39,944/- but the respondent failed to hand over the possession of the unit. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainants with interest. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Non-refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over the possession of the unit and did not refund the amount paid by them.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in completion of the project was due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainants with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ramendra Kumar Bhar…Ramendra Kumar Bhargava | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2166/2022CR/2166/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The case was disposed off in terms of a settlemen…The case was disposed off in terms of a settlement agreement dated 2.11.2022 between the parties. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The case was disposed off in terms of a settlement agreement dated 2.11.2022.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ajay Kumar FatwaniAjay Kumar Fatwani | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/725/2018CR/725/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Jai Prakash Jain & Ors. vs Vatika Limited. Case d…Jai Prakash Jain & Ors. vs Vatika Limited. Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 17.10.2022. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 17.10.2022.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ors.Ors. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2082/2022CR/2082/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Gundeep Singh Arora vs Vatika Limited: Case dispo…Gundeep Singh Arora vs Vatika Limited: Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 07.25.2022. Settlement amount not received, complaint can move for reopening/rehearing. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 25.07.2022", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Gundeep Singh AroraGundeep Singh Arora | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1300/2022CR/1300/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Jogender Kapoor vs. Vatika Ltd - Case disposed of…Jogender Kapoor vs. Vatika Ltd - Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 02.11.2022. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Case disposed off in terms of settlement agreement dated 02.11.2022.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Jogender KapoorJogender Kapoor | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1233 of 20211233 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delay in posse…The complainants sought relief for delay in possession of a plot by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for the delayed period. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the plot and sought relief for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including infrastructure development and payment issues.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for the delayed period.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mahender Singh GillMahender Singh Gill | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4029 of 20194029 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a residential unit but the…The complainant booked a residential unit but the respondent failed to deliver possession. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the residential unit and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to pay the outstanding dues and sought cancellation of the allotment.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rohit ChadhaRohit Chadha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1309 of 20191309 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a apartment admeasuring 36…The complainant booked a apartment admeasuring 360 sq. yd. for a basic sale price of Rs. 1,08,27,153/-, apart from preferential location charges (PLC) of Rs. 6,60,000/- IFMSD of Rs. 85,896;- ie., for total sale consideration of Rs. 1;15,73,049. /-, in the project. The respondent failed to complete or unable to give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale or duly completed by the date specified therein. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Failure to give possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant booked a apa…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant booked a apartment admeasuring 360 sq. yd. for a basic sale price of Rs. 1,08,27,153/-, apart from preferential location charges (PLC) of Rs. 6,60,000/- IFMSD of Rs. 85,896;- ie., for total sale consideration of Rs. 1;15,73,049. /-, in the project. The respondent failed to complete or unable to give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale or duly completed by the date specified therein.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent stated that the residential plots in the project was not aligned and completed and changes are done due to the above and several other reasons & circumstances absolutely beyond the control of the respondent on various counts.", "final_verdict": "The respondent is directed to return the amount received i.e., Rs. 20,61,411/- along with interest at the rate of 10.35% (the State Bank of India highest marginal cost of lending rate (MCLR) applicable as on date +2%) as prescribed under rule 15 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund of the amount within the timelines provided in rule 16 of the Haryana Rules 2017 ibid.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ajay YadavAjay Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6825/2019CR/6825/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest from the respondent for not handing over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period. | ["Refund of amount"…["Refund of amount", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period and sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and thus the respondent has filed a proposal for de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.35% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anr.Anr. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 337 of 2019337 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Lalit Kumar Chimanlal, filed a c…The complainant, Lalit Kumar Chimanlal, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for delay in possession of a residential plot. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the residential plot and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control and that the complainant had not made payments as per the schedule.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Lalit Kumar Chimanl…Lalit Kumar Chimanlal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4929/2021CR/4929/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought assured returns on monthl…The complainants sought assured returns on monthly basis as per the allotment letter, but the respondent refused to pay after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into force. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return of the unpaid period and execute the buyers' agreement. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Builder Buyer Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought assu…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought assured returns on monthly basis as per the allotment letter, but the respondent refused to pay after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into force.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 created a bar for payment of assured returns.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return of the unpaid period and execute the buyers' agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Umesh AnandUmesh Anand | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4879/2021CR/4879/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought possession of a commercial…The complainant sought possession of a commercial unit, delay possession charges, and assured returns. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Delay Possession Charges", "Conveyance Deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought posse…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought possession of a commercial unit, delay possession charges, and assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee but an investor and that the assured returns were not payable.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Nirmala Devi Prayag…Nirmala Devi Prayagraj Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5749 of 20195749 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid amount…The complainants sought refund of the paid amount along with interest for a delayed real estate project. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delayed Real Esta…["Delayed Real Estate Project", "Refund with Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the flat within the scheduled time and sought refund of the paid amount along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and sought a grace period.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Richa GautamRicha Gautam | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6836 of 20196836 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest from the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid by complainant"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Jatin GoelJatin Goel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1088/2022CR/1088/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delayed possess…The complainant sought relief for delayed possession, assured returns, and conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Assured returns", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the commercial unit, failed to pay assured returns, and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns as the project was not registered with RERA, and that the conveyance deed would be executed only upon receipt of full consideration.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mukesh NayarMukesh Nayar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2046 of 20212046 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest from the respondent for not completing the project as per the agreement. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not complete the project as per the agreement and sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be completed due to various reasons and filed a proposal for de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sandhya AsriSandhya Asri | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1791 of 20221791 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a unit in the Emilia Floo…The complainants booked a unit in the Emilia Floors Phase-2 project and sought refund of the amount paid along with interest due to non-delivery of possession by the respondent. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the unit within the stipulated period and sought refund of the amount paid along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and offered to refund the amount with interest.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants along with interest at the rate of 10.60% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. VijayaMrs. Vijaya | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2659 of 20212659 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 25,27,341/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 25,27,341/- paid to the respondent for a flat in the 'Tranquil Heights' project. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 10.60% per annum. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid for flat", "Non-completion of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid Rs. 25,27,341/- to the respondent for a flat in the 'Tranquil Heights' project, but the respondent had failed to complete the project and deliver possession of the flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons, including legal issues and financial constraints.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the rate of 10.60% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Siddharth DahiyaSiddharth Dahiya | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1270 of 20201270 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest from the respondent as the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale. | Refund of amount pa…Refund of amount paid by allottees | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale and sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and filed a proposal for de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 33,64,907/- paid by the complainants along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.60% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Meenu Raj KumarMrs. Meenu Raj Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2371 of 20222371 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of paid amount with in…Complainants sought refund of paid amount with interest for delayed possession of apartment. Authority directed refund with 10.60% interest. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought refund o…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought refund of paid amount with interest for delayed possession of apartment.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and offered no refund.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund of paid amount with 10.60% interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Surinder KaurMs. Surinder Kaur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2372 of 20222372 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him along with interest from the respondent for not completing the project and handing over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest for delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over the possession of the apartment within the stipulated period of 48 months.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be completed due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant along with interest at the rate of 10.60% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Nirmal SinghNirmal Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3963 of 20213963 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of Rs. 47,82,591/-…The complainants sought refund of Rs. 47,82,591/- with interest for delay in possession of a flat by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 10.60% p.a. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid Rs. 47,82,591/- to the respondent for a flat, but the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the flat within the stipulated time.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to various reasons, including force majeure conditions such as demonetization, shortage of labor, and orders passed by NGT.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 47,82,591/- with interest at the rate of 10.60% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Diksha ChadhaMs. Diksha Chadha | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1678 of 20221678 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a commercial unit in the respondent's project. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid the respondent a significant amount for a commercial unit and sought refund with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had paid assured returns to the complainants and sought to adjust the amount.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sunita GillSunita Gill | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1426 of 20211426 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him to the respondent, and the Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest on refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid a sum of Rs. 48,61,380/- to the respondent, and that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the apartment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in delivery of possession was due to various reasons, including force majeure conditions.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Yogesh KumarYogesh Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1075 of 20221075 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a flat booked in a project developed by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid for flat", "Interest at prescribed rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the flat within the stipulated period and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in handover of possession was due to various reasons beyond their control and offered to refund the amount with interest at 6% per annum.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.60% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rekha DeviRekha Devi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 789 of 2020789 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant seeks refund of amount paid for a fla…Complainant seeks refund of amount paid for a flat in a project developed by respondent, alleging non-completion of project and failure to hand over possession. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Failure to hand over possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleges that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleges that the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession of the flat, despite receiving payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claims that the delay in completion of the project was due to various reasons, including force majeure events and unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directs the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest, and advises the complainant to approach the adjudicating officer for seeking compensation.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Pradeep KumarMr. Pradeep Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4677 of 20204677 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid amount …The complainant sought refund of the paid amount with interest due to delay in possession of the flat. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 10.60%. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the flat and sought refund of the paid amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including force majeure conditions.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 10.60%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ruchi GuptaRuchi Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2416 of 20202416 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest as the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Failure to complete or give possession of unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid an amount of Rs. 33,19,222/- to the respondent for a unit, but the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they were ready to offer an alternative ready to move in the project seven elements if the complainant is interested for the same.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 33,19,222/- paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.60% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Suman Maheshwa…Mrs. Suman Maheshwari | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2085 of 20192085 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a villa in the project of…The complainants booked a villa in the project of the respondent and paid an amount of Rs. 40,95,756/-. The respondent failed to hand over possession of the villa despite the due date being 03.08.2013. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance of agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the villa despite the due date being 03.08.2013 and sought possession of the allotted villa.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the said unit was not available due to passing of GAIL pipeline over the allotted area and further submitted that there is no alternative unit available in the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the alternative plot/villa/unit as agreed between the parties, at the same rate and specifications at which the unit was earlier purchased within two months from the date of the order.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Smt. Anita AroraSmt. Anita Arora | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3138 of 20213138 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Amarpal, filed a complaint again…The complainant, Amarpal, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority found that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and sought relief for delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had failed to pay the remaining amount due and sought termination of the booking.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the subject unit within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | AmarpalAmarpal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3762 of 20193762 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund for delay in posses…The complainant sought refund for delay in possession of a flat, and the Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the flat and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that the complainant was aware of the status of the project.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Vikas AggarwalMr. Vikas Aggarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 106 of 2022106 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, TD Arora and Sunita Arora, file…The complainants, TD Arora and Sunita Arora, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for delay in possession of their allotted unit. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% p.a. for every month of delay. | Delay in possession…Delay in possession of allotted unit | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of their allotted unit beyond the stipulated period of three years.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they had not breached any agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% p.a. for every month of delay.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sunita AroraSunita Arora | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| cR/4984/2021cR/4984/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Neha Gupta and Anirudh Sharma, f…The complainant, Neha Gupta and Anirudh Sharma, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd for delay in possession of their residential plot. The complaint was disposed off as the complainants withdrew it after selling the plot to a third party. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Residential plot"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed possession of their residential plot and sought compensation.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to bonafide reasons and that the complainants had agreed to the delay.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was disposed off as the complainants withdrew it after selling the plot to a third party.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anirudh SharmaAnirudh Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4018 of 20214018 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief against the respond…The complainant sought relief against the respondent for cancellation of the allotment of a commercial unit and non-provision of possession. The authority directed the respondent to allot a new unit of the same size and price as the original unit and to provide possession of the new unit. | ["Cancellation of a…["Cancellation of allotment", "Non-provision of possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent cancelled the allotment of the commercial unit without any valid reason and did not provide possession of the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the cancellation of the allotment was due to the non-payment of dues by the complainant.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to allot a new unit of the same size and price as the original unit and to provide possession of the new unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vidya Sagar SarpalVidya Sagar Sarpal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5178 of 20195178 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Town Square-2' along with interest and compensation for delay in possession. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount"…["Refund of amount", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid a total amount of Rs. 33,32,230/- to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Town Square-2' and sought refund of the amount along with interest and compensation for delay in possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not file any written reply despite being given opportunities to do so.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 33,32,230/- with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum from the date of each payment till the actual date of realization of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Ashish SharmaMr. Ashish Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3792 of 20193792 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid amount …The complainant sought refund of the paid amount along with interest from the respondent for non-delivery of possession of the flat. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat and sought refund of the amount paid along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to refund as the project was still under construction.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Ashish SharmaMr. Ashish Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5440 of 20225440 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the 'Turning Poi…The complainant booked a unit in the 'Turning Point' project developed by M/s Vatika Limited, but the project was abandoned without any progress. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | ["Abandoned Project…["Abandoned Project", "Refund of Paid-Up Amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the project was abandoned without any progress, and they sought refund of the paid-up amount.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainant was not entitled to a refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Prabodh PraveenMr. Prabodh Praveen | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1819 of 20221819 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Vat…The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Vatika Express City' for a total sale consideration of Rs. 80,35,565/-. The respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit within the time stipulated under the terms of agreement. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit within the time stipulated under the terms of agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including unexpected introduction of a new National Highway, disruptions in the supply of stone and sand aggregate, and disruptions caused by unusually heavy rains in Gurgaon every year.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 45,99,859/- paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.70% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shraddha AvasthiShraddha Avasthi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/971/2024CR/971/2024 | HaryanaHaryana | Padam Singh Khatana vs Vatika Limited: The partie…Padam Singh Khatana vs Vatika Limited: The parties reached an amicable settlement, and a settlement agreement was signed on 04.02.2023. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties reached an amicable settlement and signed a settlement agreement on 04.02.2023.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Padam Singh KhatanaPadam Singh Khatana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1293 of 20211293 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for delayed real estate…Complainant sought refund for delayed real estate project. HARERA ordered refund with interest. | ["Delayed real esta…["Delayed real estate project", "Refund with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund fo…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund for delayed real estate project.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed delay due to various circumstances beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "HARERA ordered refund with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Deepa VermaDeepa Verma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2290 of 20222290 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid along with interest for not receiving possession of the flat within the stipulated time. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | Refund for delayed …Refund for delayed possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid the amount for the flat but did not receive possession within the stipulated time and sought refund with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and sought to avoid refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Bhupinder KaurBhupinder Kaur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1443/2021CR/1443/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him along with interest at prescribed rate of interest calculated from the date of receipt of the amount till the date the amount is refunded. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest at prescribed rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid a sum of Rs. 21,30,500/- against the total sale consideration of Rs. 1,66,89,520/- and sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and had filed a proposal for de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount received from each of the allottee deposited by them against their allotted units along with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% per annum from the date of each payment till the date of actual realization within the timeline as prescribed under rule 16 of the Rules, 2017.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Saurabh JainSaurabh Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3928 of 20213928 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for not completing the project and not refunding the amount paid. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Non-refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not complete the project and did not refund the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons and that the complainant was aware of the delay.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Jayendra Nath Chakr…Jayendra Nath Chakraborty | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2613 of 20212613 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Vipul Chaudhary, filed a complai…The complainant, Vipul Chaudhary, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by him with interest. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of obligations by promoter"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the promoter failed to develop the unit and handover possession within the stipulated time.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by him with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vipul ChaudharyVipul Chaudhary | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 487 of 2021487 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for delayed possession …Complainant sought refund for delayed possession of a residential unit. HARERA directed the respondent to return the amount with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants booked a un…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants booked a unit in the 'Xpressions by Vatika' project and paid Rs. 21,48,812/- but did not receive possession within the stipulated period.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances, including changes in the master plan and high-tension line re-routing.", "final_verdict": "HARERA directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the rate of 10.70%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Joydeep MukherjiJoydeep Mukherji | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 497 of 2018497 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest from the respondent for a project that was abandoned and not completed as per the schedule. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest. | ["Refund", "Interes…["Refund", "Interest", "Abandoned Project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a substantial amount to the respondent for a project that was not completed as per the schedule and was abandoned. They sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were in default of payments and that the project was not abandoned. They denied the complainants' claim for refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount to the complainants with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anita SardanaAnita Sardana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3511 of 20213511 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for delayed possession …Complainant sought refund for delayed possession of a villa in the 'Bellevue Villa' project. HARERA directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the villa within the stipulated time and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and sought exemption from refund.", "final_verdict": "HARERA directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shalini ChauhanShalini Chauhan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/361/2021CR/361/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Atul Singh Tyagi, filed a compla…The complainant, Atul Singh Tyagi, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not handing over possession of a villa in the 'Signature Villas' project in Gurugram. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the villa within the stipulated time and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including force majeure conditions, and sought to avoid refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Atul Singh TyagiAtul Singh Tyagi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3936/2021CR/3936/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid along with interest and compensation for mental agony and litigation costs. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% per annum. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest at prescribed rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund of the amount paid along with interest and compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and had filed a proposal for de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rashmi GuptaRashmi Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3419 of 20213419 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a commercial unit in the …The complainants booked a commercial unit in the respondent's project but the respondent failed to hand over possession within the stipulated period. The authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges and offer possession of the unit. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the commercial unit within the stipulated period of 48 months and sought delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants failed to make payments as per the agreed payment plan and sought cancellation of the booking.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges at the rate of 10.70% per annum from 05.10.2019 till receipt of occupation certificate on 17.02.2022 + 2 months.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Saleem GangarSaleem Gangar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4789 of 20204789 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 20,41,083/- …The complainant sought refund of Rs. 20,41,083/- with interest for non-delivery of possession of a residential plot by the respondent. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the residential plot within the stipulated period and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various circumstances beyond their control and sought to justify the delay.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anuj AggarwalAnuj Aggarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6726 of 20226726 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delay in posses…The complainant sought relief for delay in possession of a residential plot by the respondent. The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for the delayed period and offer possession within 30 days after obtaining completion/part completion certificate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the residential plot and sought relief for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to force majeure conditions and sought relief for the same.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for the delayed period and offer possession within 30 days after obtaining completion/part completion certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sangita ShankarSangita Shankar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1347/2020CR/1347/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The case between Divya Gupta and Vatika Seven Ele…The case between Divya Gupta and Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd. has been amicably settled, and the complaint has been withdrawn. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, Divya Gupta, had filed a complaint against Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd. and Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondents, Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd. and Vatika Limited, had denied any wrongdoing.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and the complaint has been withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Divya GuptaDivya Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1609 of 20221609 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Bharat Pal Singh, filed a compla…The complainant, Bharat Pal Singh, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Authority set aside the cancellation of the allotted unit and directed the respondent to offer possession of the unit or a similar situated alternate unit. | ["Violation of Real…["Violation of Real Estate Act", "Cancellation of Allotted Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent violated the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by cancelling the allotted unit and demanding excess amount.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to make payment as per the payment schedule and therefore, the cancellation of the allotment was justified.", "final_verdict": "The Authority set aside the cancellation of the allotted unit and directed the respondent to offer possession of the unit or a similar situated alternate unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Bharat Pal SinghBharat Pal Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3165/2021CR/3165/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount along with interest from the respondent for not handing over the possession of the unit within the stipulated period. | ["Refund", "Possess…["Refund", "Possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over the possession of the unit within the stipulated period and sought refund of the paid-up amount along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and sought de-registration of the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount along with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.70% per annum from the date of each payment till the date of actual realization.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Parul UpadhyayParul Upadhyay | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1538 of 20181538 of 2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Sunil Babu Rao Ji Khawas, filed …The complainant, Sunil Babu Rao Ji Khawas, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not refunding the paid amount for a flat in the Sovereign Park project. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount after forfeiting 10% of the basic sale price of the unit. | ["Refund of paid am…["Refund of paid amount", "Forfeiture of earnest money"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he paid Rs. 73,96,215/- for a flat in the Sovereign Park project but the respondent did not refund the amount despite his requests.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to a refund as he had not completed the payment schedule.", "final_verdict": "The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the respondent to refund the deposited amount after forfeiting 10% of the basic sale price of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sunil Babu Rao Ji K…Sunil Babu Rao Ji Khawas | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/578/2022CR/578/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest for the non-delivery of possession of the apartment by the respondent-builder. The authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the amount with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent-builder failed to deliver possession of the apartment despite receiving the full payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent-builder claimed that the delay in delivery of possession was due to various reasons including force majeure circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Saurav BhatiaSaurav Bhatia | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2333 of 20212333 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants alleged that the respondent had …The complainants alleged that the respondent had cancelled their plot without following proper procedure and had not provided a reasonable amount of compensation. The authority held that the cancellation was bad in law and directed the respondent to allot an alternative unit to the complainants. | ["Cancellation of p…["Cancellation of plot", "Alternative unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged that the respondent had cancelled their plot without following proper procedure and had not provided a reasonable amount of compensation.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the cancellation was legitimate and that the complainants had not made payments as per the payment plan.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the cancellation was bad in law and directed the respondent to allot an alternative unit to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Pardeep SinghPardeep Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3183 of 20213183 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delay in posses…The complainant sought relief for delay in possession of a commercial unit and non-payment of assured returns by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns and decline to order payment of delayed possession charges. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the commercial unit within the stipulated time and also stopped paying assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns as the project was not registered with RERA.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns at the rate of Rs. 30,000/- per month from September 2018 till the date of completion of the construction of the building.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Manik SharmaManik Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1266 of 20221266 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Rakesh Singala and Rakhee Singl…The complainants, Rakesh Singala and Rakhee Singla, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the allotted unit, pay interest at the prescribed rate, and comply with other directions. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the allotted unit within the due date as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including changes in the layout plans and acquisition of sector roads.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the allotted unit within 30 days after obtaining the occupancy certificate and pay interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rakhee SinglaRakhee Singla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4296 of 20214296 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Vat…The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Vatika Town Square' and paid Rs. 5,84,950/- but the respondent failed to hand over possession within the stipulated period. The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay and to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainant. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the unit within the stipulated period and demanded interest for the delay.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to pay the outstanding dues and therefore, the possession was not handed over.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate for every month of delay and to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Dr. Namrata ManshaniDr. Namrata Manshani | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/461/2022CR/461/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and execut…The complainant sought assured returns and execution of buyer's agreement from the respondent. The Authority directed the respondent to pay outstanding assured returns and execute the buyer's agreement. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Buyer's Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and execute the buyer's agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns scheme was illegal and that they had not failed to execute the buyer's agreement.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay outstanding assured returns and execute the buyer's agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kamal NarulaKamal Narula | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4760/2020CR/4760/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Application for rectification of order dated 28.1…Application for rectification of order dated 28.10.2022. The order dated 28.10.2022 stands rectified accordingly as per above mentioned table. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of order"] | {"appellant_claim": "The applicant has submitted …{"appellant_claim": "The applicant has submitted that names, unit nos. & amount paid up of the complainants have been incorrectly mentioned in the beginning of the judgment and also in the detailed table mentioned in para no. 3 and need to be rectified at the said places.", "respondent_claim": "Both the parties were given time to reconcile the correct facts from the record.", "final_verdict": "The order dated 28.10.2022 stands rectified accordingly as per above mentioned table.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Himanshu PachauriHimanshu Pachauri | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6081 of 20196081 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount less the amount already received by the complainants by way of assured returns. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount less the amount already received by the complainants by way of assured returns. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount", "Assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought refu…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount less the amount already received by the complainants by way of assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that assured returns were banned by the BUDS, Act 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount less the amount already received by the complainants by way of assured returns.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neera MathurNeera Mathur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6082 of 20196082 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount less the amount already received by way of assured returns. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount less the amount already received by way of assured returns. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought refu…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount less the amount already received by way of assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were banned by the BUDS Act 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount less the amount already received by way of assured returns.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neera MathurNeera Mathur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/489/2022CR/489/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and posses…The complainant sought assured returns and possession of a commercial unit from the respondent, Vatika Limited. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Possession of Commercial Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and deliver possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and that the project was delayed due to various reasons.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sandhya Singh ParmarSandhya Singh Parmar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/173/2022CR/173/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the project 'One…The complainant booked a unit in the project 'One on One' developed by Vatika Limited and paid Rs. 41,58,000/-. The complainant sought relief regarding execution of buyer's agreement, payment of assured returns, and execution of conveyance deed. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of statutory obligations", "Assured returns", "Execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the allotment letter, including payment of assured returns and execution of conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had already paid the entire amount towards the construction of the allotted unit and that the unit was booked under an assured return scheme.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of amount of assured return at agreed rate to the complainant(s), execute the buyer's agreement within 15 days, and execute the conveyance deed of the allotted unit within 3 months from the final offer of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Adhiraj Singh JohalAdhiraj Singh Johal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2690/2022CR/2690/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and posses…The complainant sought assured returns and possession of a commercial unit from the respondent, Vatika Limited. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Possession of Commercial Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and deliver possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and possession of the unit.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kundan Lal KalraKundan Lal Kalra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1113/2021CR/1113/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Reena Kakcker & Anr. vs Vatika Limited. Applicati…Reena Kakcker & Anr. vs Vatika Limited. Application for rectification allowed and disposed off. | ["Rectification App…["Rectification Application"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant-a…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant-applicant submitted that the complainants paid a total amount of Rs. 44,31,567/- to the respondent and the respondent has refunded back an amount of Rs. 29,48,732/- to the complainants.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The respondent is directed to refund the remaining amount ie, Rs. 12,98,098/- plus interest amount of Rs. 2,81,640/-.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anr.Anr. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2535 of 20212535 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Yogesh Kochhar, filed a complain…The complainant, Yogesh Kochhar, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd for not handing over the possession of a flat in the project 'Vatika Seven Elements' despite receiving the full payment. The Authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainant with interest and without deduction of 10%. | ["Non-handover of p…["Non-handover of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid the full amount for the flat but the respondent did not hand over the possession despite repeated requests.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had not made the payments on time and therefore, the cancellation of the flat was valid.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainant with interest and without deduction of 10%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Yogesh KochharYogesh Kochhar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4220/2022CR/4220/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against the re…The complainants filed a complaint against the respondent for not handing over the possession of the unit within the stipulated time period and for not paying the assured returns. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and to execute the conveyance deed of the allotted unit. | Delay in possession…Delay in possession and non-payment of assured returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not hand over the possession of the unit within the stipulated time period and did not pay the assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to the assured returns as the project was not completed within the stipulated time period.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and to execute the conveyance deed of the allotted unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Harish YadavHarish Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1537 of 20221537 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for not paying assured returns despite receiving payment. The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Conveyance Deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns despite receiving payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had paid assured returns up to September 2018 and that the complainant was not entitled to further payments.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sushil NagpalSushil Nagpal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2314 of 20222314 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a villa in the project of…The complainants booked a villa in the project of the respondent and filed a complaint for delay in possession. The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plot/unit and pay interest for delayed possession. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Alternative plot/unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the villa and sought possession of the allotted villa as one of their reliefs.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the said unit was not available due to passing of GAIL pipeline over the allotted area.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plot/unit as agreed between the parties, at the same rate at which the unit was earlier purchased within two months from the date of this order.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Vandana Bhardw…Mrs. Vandana Bhardwaj | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 534-2022534-2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought compensation for delayed poss…Complainants sought compensation for delayed possession of a plot and harassment by the respondent. The adjudicating officer allowed Rs. 5 lakhs as compensation and Rs. 50,000 as litigation costs. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Harassment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the plot within the agreed-upon timeframe and had caused them harassment and mental agony.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to unforeseen circumstances and that the complainants had already been granted relief in the form of delayed possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The adjudicating officer allowed Rs. 5 lakhs as compensation to the complainants and Rs. 50,000 as litigation costs.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Meenu GoelMeenu Goel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3787/2021CR/3787/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Subhash Mehta vs Vatika Limited: The matter has b…Subhash Mehta vs Vatika Limited: The matter has been amicably settled, and a settlement deed has been signed by both parties. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter has been amicably settled, and a settlement deed has been signed by both parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Subhash MehtaSubhash Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3073/2021CR/3073/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Sharwan Kumar, filed a complaint…The complainant, Sharwan Kumar, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited. The Authority allowed the application for rectification of clerical error in the order dated 10.11.2022. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of clerical error"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that there was a clerical error in the order dated 10.11.2022.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not make any claim.", "final_verdict": "The Authority allowed the application for rectification of clerical error.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sharwan KumarSharwan Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5200 of 20225200 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a commercial unit in the r…The complainant booked a commercial unit in the respondent's project but the respondent failed to complete the construction and offer possession. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of construction", "Failure to offer possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the construction and offer possession of the commercial unit despite receiving the full payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was aware of the status of the project and the fact that the commercial unit was only intended for lease and never for physical possession.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mohammad ShafiMohammad Shafi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4551 of 20224551 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid with interest due to delay in possession of the flat by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | Delay in possession…Delay in possession of flat | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat within the stipulated period and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including change in layout plan, initiation of GAIL corridor, non-removal of defunct high-tension lines, and non-acquisition of sector roads by HUDA.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sonal Jain S/o Raji…Sonal Jain S/o Rajiv Krishan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4569 of 20224569 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in respondent's pro…The complainant booked a unit in respondent's project for total sale consideration of Rs. 1,44,45,010/- against which he has already paid an amount of Rs, 98,19,631/-. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest on refundable amount"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant c…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to deliver the possession of the unit within the stipulated period and had also failed to return the excess payment made by the complainant.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had failed to make payments in time and had also failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount after deduction of 10% earnest money along with prescribed rate of interest i.e. 10.70% per annum from the date of acceptance of termination i.e., 16.09.2021 till the actual date of realization of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ajay Narain GuptaAjay Narain Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6280/2022CR/6280/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a plot in the Vatika India Next project developed by Vatika Limited. The authority directed the promoter to refund the amount with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest at prescribed rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the promoter failed to deliver possession of the plot and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had booked the plot without ensuring that the project was RERA registered.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the promoter to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Esha ChughEsha Chugh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/956/2022CR/956/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Prem Lata Singh vs Vatika Limited: The parties se…Prem Lata Singh vs Vatika Limited: The parties settled their dispute amicably, and a settlement agreement was signed on 26.05.2023. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties settled their dispute amicably, and a settlement agreement was signed on 26.05.2023.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Prem Lata SinghPrem Lata Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2332 of 20222332 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, a buyer, sought refund of the am…The complainant, a buyer, sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a delayed real estate project. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the promoter to refund the amount with interest. | ["Delayed real esta…["Delayed real estate project", "Refund of amount with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the promoter failed to complete the project and hand over possession within the stipulated time, and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they were making efforts to complete the project.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | ComplainantComplainant | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| MA NO. 127/2023 in …MA NO. 127/2023 in CR/2179/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Sangeeta Diwan, filed an applica…The complainant, Sangeeta Diwan, filed an application for rectification of an order dated 02.12.2022. The Authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay Possession …["Delay Possession Charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not paid delay possession charges at the prescribed rate.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had already paid the delay possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of 10.35% p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession i.e., 29.03.2016 till offer of possession + 2 months or actual handing over of possession whichever is earlier i.e., upto 25.09.2016 only (date of handing over of possession).", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sangeeta DiwanSangeeta Diwan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1860 of 20221860 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns from the r…The complainant sought assured returns from the respondent, a real estate developer, but the respondent refused to pay after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into force. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns to the complainant. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assur…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assured returns from the respondent, a real estate developer, but the respondent refused to pay after the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 came into force.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 created a bar for payment of assured returns.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shani JoharShani Johar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3192-20223192-2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief regarding non-compl…The complainant sought relief regarding non-compliance of obligations by the promoter, including delayed possession and non-payment of assured returns. The Authority directed the respondent to pay arrears of assured returns and execute a buyer's agreement. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of obligations", "Delayed possession", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not complied with the terms and conditions of the allotment letter, including delayed possession and non-payment of assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had not provided the correct facts and that the complaint was filed without cause of action.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay arrears of assured returns and execute a buyer's agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Rashmi MahajanMrs. Rashmi Mahajan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/491/2022CR/491/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Richa Mehta vs Vatika Limited: The parties have a…Richa Mehta vs Vatika Limited: The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a settlement agreement has been placed on record. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a settlement agreement has been placed on record.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Richa MehtaRicha Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5961 of 20225961 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges a…The complainant sought delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of 10.75% p.a. from the due date of possession till the actual handing over of possession. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and offer possession of the allotted unit within 30 days after obtaining OC from the concerned authority. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest on delayed possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the subject apartment within the stipulated period of three years from the date of execution of the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to various reasons beyond their control, including force majeure conditions and events outside their power.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.75% p.a. from the due date of possession till the actual handing over of possession and offer possession of the allotted unit within 30 days after obtaining OC from the concerned authority.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Chakresh JainChakresh Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1058/2022CR/1058/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought possession of their villa…The complainants sought possession of their villa, delay possession charges, and execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plots, pay interest, and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of their villa within the agreed-upon time frame and sought compensation for the delay.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances, including the passage of the GAIL pipeline through the project area.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plots to the complainants at the same rate as the original purchase, pay interest at the prescribed rate of 10.75% per annum, and execute the conveyance deed in favor of the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anubha KhannaAnubha Khanna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4623 of 20224623 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought assured returns on monthl…The complainants sought assured returns on monthly basis as per clause 4 of allotment letter at Rs. 159.25 per sq.ft. till the date of completion of building. The respondent refused to pay the same by taking a plea of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Builder Buyer Agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought assu…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought assured returns on monthly basis as per clause 4 of allotment letter at Rs. 159.25 per sq.ft. till the date of completion of building.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent refused to pay the same by taking a plea of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The respondent is directed to pay the arrears of amount of assured return at agreed rate to the complainant(s) from the date the payment of assured return till the date of completion of construction of building.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Meena UppalMrs. Meena Uppal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2186/2022CR/2186/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Rupal Malhotra withdrew complaint aga…Complainant Rupal Malhotra withdrew complaint against Vatika Limited as final payment received. Matter disposed off. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint withdrawn by appellant", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rupal MalhotraRupal Malhotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/607/2023CR/607/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Devender Singh filed a complaint against Vatika L…Devender Singh filed a complaint against Vatika Limited, which was amicably settled on 28.06.2023. The case was disposed of on 08.08.2023. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter was amicably settled on 28.06.2023, and the case was disposed of on 08.08.2023.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Devender SinghDevender Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3245 of 20213245 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Mr. Rajeev Singhvi and Mrs. Ritu…The complainant, Mr. Rajeev Singhvi and Mrs. Ritu Singhvi, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | ["Real Estate", "Pr…["Real Estate", "Project Abandonment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged that the respondent failed to provide details about the project, including the area of the apartment, buy-back scheme, and subvention plan. They also claimed that the respondent did not provide a reliable service and neglected compliance with the Authority's procedures.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons beyond their control, including government notifications, force majeure conditions, and the COVID-19 pandemic. They also stated that the project was not abandoned and that they had been paying pre-EMI interest as committed.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest and gave a period of 90 days to comply with the directions.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Ritu SinghviMrs. Ritu Singhvi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 670 of 2022670 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Mr. Tej Pal Sahni and Mr. Deepa…The complainants, Mr. Tej Pal Sahni and Mr. Deepak Sahni, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return amount and delay possession charges. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and delayed possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to assured returns and that the delay in possession was due to unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return amount and delay possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Deepak SahniMr. Deepak Sahni | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 756 of 2022756 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought possession of a commercial…The complainant sought possession of a commercial unit, delay possession charges, and execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Assured returns", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought posse…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought possession of a commercial unit, delay possession charges, and execution of the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee and that the unit was not meant for physical possession.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Raman MahajanRaman Mahajan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4900/2020CR/4900/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought rectification of the order…The complainant sought rectification of the order dated 28.10.2021 passed by the Authority. The Authority allowed the rectification based on the latest statement of account. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of Order"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought recti…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought rectification of the order dated 28.10.2021 passed by the Authority.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent had no objections to the rectification being allowed as per the latest statement of account.", "final_verdict": "The Authority allowed the rectification based on the latest statement of account.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vikas JindalVikas Jindal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/130/2022CR/130/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and execut…The complainant sought assured returns and execution of conveyance deeds from the respondent, a real estate developer. The authority directed the respondent to pay arrears of assured returns and execute conveyance deeds. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Conveyance Deeds"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and execute conveyance deeds.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and that the conveyance deeds were not required.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay arrears of assured returns and execute conveyance deeds.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Santosh YadavSantosh Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 64910f201964910f2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought compensation and refund for a…Complainants sought compensation and refund for a real estate project developed by the respondent. The adjudicating officer directed the respondent to pay compensation and refund. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute", "Compensation"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to deliver possession of their flat and sought compensation for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were aware of the change in the master layout plan and that the complainants had not paid the full amount due.", "final_verdict": "The adjudicating officer directed the respondent to pay compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- and litigation costs of Rs. 40,000/- to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Babloo Singh WaliaBabloo Singh Walia | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/132/2022CR/132/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns from the r…The complainant sought assured returns from the respondent, but the respondent refused to pay, citing the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and execute the conveyance deed. | Assured ReturnsAssured Returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent refused to pay assured returns despite repeated requests.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the payment of assured returns was illegal under the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured returns and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Gaurav TandonGaurav Tandon | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 275 of 2022275 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns and posses…The complainant sought assured returns and possession of a commercial unit from the respondent, a real estate developer. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured return and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Possession of Commercial Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns and deliver possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to assured returns and that the project was not complete.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured return and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Satish MalikSatish Malik | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3686/2022CR/3686/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Simmi Puri vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settlement…Simmi Puri vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settlement reached, complaint disposed off. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Amicable settlement reached", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Simmi PuriSimmi Puri | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| __ 6155 of 2022__ 6155 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for unpaid amount with …Complainant sought refund for unpaid amount with interest due to non-development of the project by the respondent. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund for non-de…["Refund for non-development of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not develop the project and sought refund for the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Prateek KaushalPrateek Kaushal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2342 of 20222342 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for delayed possession …Complainant sought refund for delayed possession of flat. Authority directed refund with 10.75% interest. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund fo…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund for delayed possession of flat.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed delay due to various reasons, including COVID-19 pandemic.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund of Rs. 31,83,022/- with 10.75% interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Tilak Raj KhatriTilak Raj Khatri | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/8001/2022CR/8001/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, d…The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the builder-buyer agreement. | Unpaid Assured Retu…Unpaid Assured Returns, Delay Possession Charges, and Conveyance Deed | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to unpaid assured returns and delay possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the builder-buyer agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shwaytal Gaurav Kau…Shwaytal Gaurav Kaushik | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2391 of 20212391 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid with interest and compensation for delay in possession of the flat. The authority directed the respondents to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid the amount for the flat but the respondents had failed to deliver possession within the stipulated time.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they were making efforts to complete the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Geetika MittalGeetika Mittal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1012 of 20221012 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought a refund of the amount pa…The complainants sought a refund of the amount paid to the respondent for a flat, as the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat within the stipulated period. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund for failur…["Refund for failure to deliver possession"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants claimed that they had paid Rs. 31,35,567/- to the respondent for a flat, but the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat within the stipulated period of 48 months. The complainants sought a refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the delay in delivery of possession was due to force majeure circumstances, including orders passed by the Hon'ble SC to Stop construction, notification of the Municipal corporations Gurugram, etc. The respondent claimed that they had obtained an occupation certificate from the competent authority on 12.06.2023, but the complainants had already surrendered the unit by filing the present complaint on 11.03.2022.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 31,35,567/- with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a. from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund of the amount. A period of 90 days was given to the respondents to comply with the directions given in this order, failing which legal consequences would follow.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kamna SananKamna Sanan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6258/20226258/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest for the abandoned project 'Turning Point' developed by Vatika Limited. | ["Abandoned Project…["Abandoned Project", "Refund of Paid-Up Amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the project 'Turning Point' developed by Vatika Limited was abandoned, and they sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "Vatika Limited claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainant was not entitled to a refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the project was abandoned and ordered Vatika Limited to refund the paid-up amount with interest to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Bharat BhusanBharat Bhusan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3022 of 20213022 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought possession of a villa unit…The complainant sought possession of a villa unit and delay possession charges from the respondent, who failed to hand over possession within the stipulated period. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and offer possession of the unit. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with builder buyer agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the villa unit within the stipulated period and sought delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control, including changes in the alignment of the GAIL pipeline and acquisition of sector roads.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and offer possession of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Raj Kumar MaggonRaj Kumar Maggon | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2989 of 20212989 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought possession of a villa uni…The complainants sought possession of a villa unit and delay possession charges from the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and offer possession of the unit. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with building agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the villa unit within the stipulated period and sought delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control and sought to refund the amount paid by the complainants.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and offer possession of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Raj Kumar MaggonRaj Kumar Maggon | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6773/2019CR/6773/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Kapil Khanna vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settleme…Kapil Khanna vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settlement reached, matter disposed off. | ["Amicable settleme…["Amicable settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Amicable settlement reached between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kapil KhannaKapil Khanna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 7325 of 20227325 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid for a flat in a project developed by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid for flat", "Delay in possession of flat"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the flat and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to unforeseen circumstances and sought to avoid refunding the amount.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Harish ChuphalMr. Harish Chuphal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 7566 of 20227566 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them to the respondent-builder for a residential apartment in the 'Turning Point' project, which was found to be abandoned by the authority. The respondent was directed to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | ["Refund for abando…["Refund for abandoned project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent-builder had failed to deliver possession of the residential apartment and had abandoned the project. They sought refund of the amount paid by them.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent-builder claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainants were not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the project was abandoned and directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Krishan ChanderKrishan Chander | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7680/2022CR/7680/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant seeks refund of the amount paid b…The complainant seeks refund of the amount paid by them along with interest due to non-completion of the project within a reasonable time. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claims that …{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claims that the respondent failed to complete the project within a reasonable time and seeks refund of the amount paid along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claims that the project was completed within the stipulated time and that the complainant is not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directs the respondent to refund the amount received by it from each of the complainant(s) along with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajni SajalRajni Sajal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1300 of 20231300 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount besides interest as the promoter has failed to raise construction as per the schedule of construction despite demands being raised from them and the project being abandoned. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount", "Failure of promoter to raise construction as per schedule"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a sum of Rs. 63,94,958/- to the respondent against the total sale consideration of Rs. 1,46,23,406/- but due to misrepresentations w.r.t. the project, they did not pay the remaining amount and are seeking refund of the paid-up amount besides interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be delivered due to various reasons and it has filed a proposal for de-registration of the project in question.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent/promoter to refund the amount paid by the complainants after deducting the amount already returned by it Le. Rs. 13,42,412/- along with prescribed rate of interest @ 10.75% p.a. from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Aahana GuptaAahana Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 348 of 2023348 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of Rs. 23,81,819/- fro…Complainants sought refund of Rs. 23,81,819/- from respondent for abandoned project. Authority directed refund with interest. | ["Abandoned Project…["Abandoned Project", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants alleged that the respondent had abandoned the project and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainants were not entitled to a refund.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Beae TanejaBeae Taneja | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 7690 of 20227690 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them to the respondent for a residential property due to delay in completion of the project. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Delay in completi…["Delay in completion of project", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a sum of Rs. 64,65,613/- to the respondent for a residential property, but the respondent failed to complete the project within the stipulated period.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in completion of the project was due to various reasons, including shortage of labour, orders passed by NGT, and weather conditions.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anshu MalhotraAnshu Malhotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 5270 of 20225270 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Tranquil Heights' due to non-delivery of possession. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid a sum of Rs. 51,02,270/- to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Tranquil Heights' but the respondent failed to deliver possession of the flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project could not be completed and developed on time due to various reasons including government notifications, force majeure conditions, and breakdown of Covid-19 pandemic.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Nitin KhullarNitin Khullar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7385/2022CR/7385/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, d…The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execution of conveyance deeds. The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding accrued assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Delay Possession Charges", "Conveyance Deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to the assured returns and delay possession charges.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding accrued assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ashwani BudhirajaAshwani Budhiraja | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3576 of 20213576 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought payment of assured returns…The complainant sought payment of assured returns from the respondent, a real estate developer. The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and comply with the builder-buyer agreement. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and comply with the builder-buyer agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Anil SoodShri Anil Sood | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7803/2022CR/7803/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The matter has been amicably settled between the …The matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and an MoU dated 26.7.2023 has been placed on record. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and an MoU dated 26.7.2023 has been placed on record.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajiv PopliRajiv Popli | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2798 of 20212798 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Late Sh. Vijay Rattan Sawhney a…The complainants, Late Sh. Vijay Rattan Sawhney and Ms. Kamlesh Sawhney, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount received by it from the complainants along with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of obligations", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to complete or give possession of the unit in accordance with the terms of agreement for sale or duly completed by the date specified therein.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had already received the amount invested in the said unit by way of committed return.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount received by it from the complainants along with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Kamlesh SawhneyMs. Kamlesh Sawhney | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2799 of 20212799 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of amount paid for a c…Complainants sought refund of amount paid for a commercial unit in a project developed by respondent. Authority directed respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid for commercial unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed that th…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed that they had paid a sum of Rs. 31,51,500/- for a commercial unit in a project developed by respondent. They claimed that respondent had failed to hand over possession of the unit and sought refund of the amount paid.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that the complainants had not paid the full amount due and that the project was delayed due to various reasons including legal issues and natural disasters.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 31,51,500/- with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a. from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Late Sh. Vijay Ratt…Late Sh. Vijay Rattan Sawhney | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3974 of 20213974 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest for delay in completion of the project. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the rate of 10.75%. | ["Delay in completi…["Delay in completion of project", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had delayed the completion of the project and sought refund of the amount paid by them along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they had not failed to complete the project.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the rate of 10.75%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Satish Kumar Bharga…Satish Kumar Bhargava | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4882/2021CR/4882/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Dr. Poonam Mukim, filed a compla…The complainant, Dr. Poonam Mukim, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not handing over the possession of a commercial unit and not paying assured returns. The authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over the possession of the commercial unit and did not pay assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee but an investor and that the assured returns were not payable.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest and execute the conveyance deed within three months from the final offer of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Dr. Poonam MukimDr. Poonam Mukim | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 772 of 2023772 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for delayed project. H…Complainants sought refund for delayed project. HARERA ordered refund with interest. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed project"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants booked an apartment in the 'Vatika Turning Point' project but the respondent failed to complete the project or give possession of the unit. The complainants sought a refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including force majeure circumstances such as orders passed by the Hon'ble SC to stop construction, notification of the Municipal corporations Gurugram, Covid 19, etc.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The HARERA ordered the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a. from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Priya PrerakPriya Prerak | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7268/2022CR/7268/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The matter has been settled amicably, and the due…The matter has been settled amicably, and the due amount has been received by the complainant. An application for withdrawal of the complaint has been filed. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, Vipin Gupta, had filed a complaint against Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Limited had responded to the complaint.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter has been settled amicably, and the due amount has been received by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vipin GuptaVipin Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4561/2022CR/4561/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The case was settled amicably between the parties…The case was settled amicably between the parties, and the matter stands disposed off. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute", "Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellants claimed that …{"appellant_claim": "The appellants claimed that the respondent had not fulfilled its obligations.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the appellants had not paid the full amount.", "final_verdict": "The matter was settled amicably, and the appellants paid the full amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Percis Vaibhav …Ms. Percis Vaibhav Sian | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1243 of 20231243 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought possession of flat and delay p…Complainant sought possession of flat and delay possession charges from respondent. Authority directed respondent to pay interest at 10.75% per annum and offer possession within 30 days after obtaining occupation certificate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possessio…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought possession of flat and delay possession charges from respondent.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that delay was due to various circumstances beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed respondent to pay interest at 10.75% per annum and offer possession within 30 days after obtaining occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sukhbir SinghSukhbir Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3140 of 20213140 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him with interest from the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid by complainant"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent increased the area of the unit by more than 10% and demanded more money. The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to make payments as per the agreed payment plan and that the increase in area was within the permissible limit.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Dev Kumar AggarwalDev Kumar Aggarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3935 of 20233935 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of paid amount due …The complainant sought refund of paid amount due to delay in possession of flat. HARERA directed refund with interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed refu…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed refund of paid amount due to delay in possession of flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including force majeure.", "final_verdict": "HARERA directed refund of paid amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Monika AggarwalMonika Aggarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3712 of 20233712 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund for unpaid amount from …Complainant sought refund for unpaid amount from respondent for abandoned project. Authority directed respondent to refund amount with interest. | ["Refund for Abando…["Refund for Abandoned Project"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought refund for the amount paid to the respondent for the abandoned project.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Maya JainMaya Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1444 of 20231444 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of Rs. 28,46,328/-…The complainants sought refund of Rs. 28,46,328/- paid to the respondent for a commercial unit in the Vatika Town Square project. The Authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest at the rate of 10.85%. | Refund for Undelive…Refund for Undelivered Commercial Unit | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they paid Rs. 28,46,328/- to the respondent for a commercial unit in the Vatika Town Square project, but the respondent failed to deliver the possession of the unit within the stipulated time.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were aware of the delays in the project and had not complained about the same earlier.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to return the amount of Rs. 28,46,328/- to the complainants with interest at the rate of 10.85%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Bhavna GoyalBhavna Goyal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6261 of 20226261 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid along with interest on account of non-completion of the project in due time as agreed between the parties. The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by him with interest at the rate of 10.85%. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Refund of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to complete the project in due time and sought refund of the amount paid along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to make payments in time and that the project was completed within the agreed-upon time frame.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount received by him with interest at the rate of 10.85%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rakesh BhatlaRakesh Bhatla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4965 of 20214965 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought possession of a villa and …The complainant sought possession of a villa and delay possession charges from the respondent, who was found to be in contravention of section 11(4)(a) of the Act. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and hand over possession of the villa. | ["Possession of vil…["Possession of villa", "Delay possession charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought posse…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought possession of a villa and delay possession charges from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the villa was not available due to GAIL pipeline and reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate and hand over possession of the villa.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Pulak MukherjeePulak Mukherjee | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 417/2023 in CR/2376…417/2023 in CR/2376/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought rectification in the name …The complainant sought rectification in the name of the complainant and the authority allowed the rectification. The authority also observed that the respondent has not obtained occupation certificate in respect of the subject project. | ["Rectification", "…["Rectification", "Occupation Certificate"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought rectification in the name of the complainant and the authority allowed the rectification.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent has not obtained occupation certificate in respect of the subject project.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority allowed the rectification and observed that the respondent has not obtained occupation certificate in respect of the subject project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shubhlakshmi SinghShubhlakshmi Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 241 of 2022241 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a retail space in the pro…The complainants booked a retail space in the project 'One on One' and paid a sum of Rs. 4,45,53,600/- but did not receive the promised assured returns, allotment of the unit, and execution of the agreement for sale. The respondent failed to refund the complete amount as per the undertaking dated 28.01.2021. | ["Non-refund of com…["Non-refund of complete amount", "Failure to provide assured returns", "Non-execution of agreement for sale"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they did not receive the promised assured returns, allotment of the unit, and execution of the agreement for sale. They also claimed that the respondent failed to refund the complete amount as per the undertaking dated 28.01.2021.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants surrendered the unit by requesting for refund on 05.02.2019, way before the due date of possession, and hence it was empowered to deduct the earnest money before making refund.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount after deducting 10% of the sale consideration being earnest money along with interest at the prescribed rates from the date of cancellation i.e., 05.02.2019 up to the date of actual realization.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Randeep Singh NandalRandeep Singh Nandal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1955/2022CR/1955/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them with interest and compensation for delay in possession of the commercial unit. The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by it with interest. | ["Refund", "Compens…["Refund", "Compensation", "Delay in Possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed ref…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed refund of the amount paid by them with interest and compensation for delay in possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to unforeseen circumstances and that they had fulfilled their obligations under the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by it with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Gaurav GandotraGaurav Gandotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| cR/1066/2022cR/1066/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Abhay Garg and Madhurima Garg vs Vatika Limited. …Abhay Garg and Madhurima Garg vs Vatika Limited. The matter was settled amicably and a settlement deed was executed. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The matter was settled amicably and a settlement deed was executed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Madhurima GargMadhurima Garg | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3473 of 20233473 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Vatika Turning Point' as the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession of the flat. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid for flat", "Non-completion of project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid Rs. 12,82,655/- to the respondent for a flat in the project 'Vatika Turning Point' but the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession of the flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons including defaults by buyers, demonetization, and ban on construction.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 12,82,655/- with interest at the rate of 10.85% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Geeta TyagiGeeta Tyagi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3327 of 20233327 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant seeks refund for unpaid flat in proje…Complainant seeks refund for unpaid flat in project 'Tranquil Heights' due to delay in possession. Authority directs refund with interest. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant seeks refund for…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant seeks refund for unpaid flat in project 'Tranquil Heights' due to delay in possession.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claims delay due to various reasons including buyer defaults and demonetization.", "final_verdict": "Authority directs refund with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms Umamaheshwari Ha…Ms Umamaheshwari Hampi Reddy Arudappa | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2948 of 20202948 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a plot in the respondent'…The complainants booked a plot in the respondent's project in 2010 and paid the demanded amount in hope to get the possession. The respondent failed to handover the possession of the plot till date of this order. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance of agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to handover the possession of the plot despite paying the demanded amount.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to various unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the alternative plot at the same rate and specifications as the original plot.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shalini KumariShalini Kumari | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6205 of 20226205 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought delay possession charges …The complainants sought delay possession charges and physical possession of the unit. The authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the unit complete in all respect and pay delay possession charges. | ["Delay possession"…["Delay possession", "Physical possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought dela…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought delay possession charges and physical possession of the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had failed to make payments in time and had frustrated the terms and conditions of the floor buyer's agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to offer possession of the unit complete in all respect and pay delay possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | BabliBabli | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7592/2022CR/7592/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The matter has been amicably settled between the …The matter has been amicably settled between the parties, and the counsel for the respondent shall be filing a copy of the settlement deed within two weeks. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter has been amicably settled between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ritu DewanRitu Dewan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6079/2022CR/6079/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, d…The complainants sought unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execution of conveyance deeds. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Assured returns",…["Assured returns", "Delay possession charges", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to pay the assured returns and delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were investors and not consumers, and therefore, not entitled to the protection of the Act.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vikram HUFVikram HUF | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2566 of 20232566 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought unpaid assured returns on…The complainants sought unpaid assured returns on monthly basis from the respondent as per the agreed terms. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return at the agreed rate. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought unpa…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought unpaid assured returns on monthly basis from the respondent as per the agreed terms.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable as the project was complete and the building was ready for possession.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return at the agreed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kamal CapoorKamal Capoor | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1138 of 20221138 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought possession of a plot and …The complainants sought possession of a plot and delay possession charges due to the respondent's failure to hand over possession within the stipulated period. The authority directed the respondent to hand over possession of an alternative unit and pay delay possession charges at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-compliance with building agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the plot within the stipulated period and sought delay possession charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances, including the initiation of the GAIL corridor and non-acquisition of sector roads by HUDA.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to hand over possession of an alternative unit and pay delay possession charges at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anoop Kumar YadavAnoop Kumar Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4826 of 20224826 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delay in posses…The complainant sought relief for delay in possession of a flat and non-execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed and not to charge anything not part of the payment plan. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the flat and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to force majeure circumstances and that the complainant had not made the payments as per the schedule.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed and not to charge anything not part of the payment plan.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Indira GandhiIndira Gandhi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 300 of 2023300 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them to the respondent against the allotment of the unit. The Authority held that the project has been abandoned and directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants along with prescribed rate of interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Abandoned project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a total amount of Rs. 17,03,602/- to the respondent against the allotment of the unit and sought refund of the same along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project has not been abandoned and that the complainants are not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The Authority held that the project has been abandoned and directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants along with prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Hema RaniHema Rani | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4204/2021CR/4204/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Amit Agarwal vs Vatika Ltd - The parties have arr…Amit Agarwal vs Vatika Ltd - The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement agreement dated 04.10.2023 has been filed. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement agreement dated 04.10.2023 has been filed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Amit AgarwalAmit Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 324 and 330 of 2023324 and 330 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought unpaid assured returns, de…The complainant sought unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execution of conveyance deeds. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return at the agreed rate and execute the conveyance deed within 3 months from the date of receipt of the OC. | ["Assured returns",…["Assured returns", "Delay possession charges", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought unpai…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought unpaid assured returns, delay possession charges, and execution of conveyance deeds.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was not payable in view of the enactment of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured return at the agreed rate and execute the conveyance deed within 3 months from the date of receipt of the OC.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ms. Ankur BerryMs. Ankur Berry | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| COM-012-Tower-E-3-3…COM-012-Tower-E-3-330 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to handover constructive possession of the unit, pay the amount of assured return, and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Violation of sect…["Violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent violated section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 by not handing over the possession of the unit and not paying the assured return.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to the assured return as per the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to handover constructive possession of the unit, pay the amount of assured return, and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rohin AroraRohin Arora | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2412/2022CR/2412/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by them in respect of the subject unit along with interest. The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by him with interest at the rate of 10.85%. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest at prescribed rate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by them in respect of the subject unit along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not entitled to refund as the project was not completed and the possession of the unit was not given.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the promoter to return the amount received by him with interest at the rate of 10.85%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rohit KhannaRohit Khanna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| MA NO. 378/2023 in …MA NO. 378/2023 in CR/ 1058/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Rajesh Khana and Anubhava Khana,…The complainant, Rajesh Khana and Anubhava Khana, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for delayed possession of a flat. The HARERA directed the respondent to provide an alternate plot/unit of the same size, similar location, and at the same rate within 2 months. | ["Delayed Possessio…["Delayed Possession", "Alternate Plot"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent, Vatika Limited, had delayed the possession of their flat.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including technical issues and unforeseen circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondent to provide an alternate plot/unit of the same size, similar location, and at the same rate within 2 months.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anubhava KhanaAnubhava Khana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| MA NO. 41/2024 in C…MA NO. 41/2024 in CR/551/2023 | GurugramGurugram | The complainant filed a rectification application…The complainant filed a rectification application to withdraw the previous application and file a fresh one. The application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application. | ["Rectification app…["Rectification application"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant f…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant filed a rectification application to withdraw the previous application and file a fresh one.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "None", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The application was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajender Kumar GoyalRajender Kumar Goyal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2754 of 20232754 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for delay in posses…The complainant sought relief for delay in possession of a flat, and the authority directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest on delay"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the flat beyond the agreed-upon date and sought relief for the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances, including changes in the layout plans and construction of a new highway.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest, i.e., 10.85% p.a., for every month of delay on the amount paid by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Pankaj GoelPankaj Goel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6538 of 20226538 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges, …The complainant sought delay possession charges, execution of conveyance deed, and refund of excess administrative charges. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge excess amounts. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Conveyance deed", "Administrative charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the unit and sought delay possession charges, execution of conveyance deed, and refund of excess administrative charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons, including force majeure circumstances, and that the complainant had voluntarily participated in the re-allotment process.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest at the prescribed rate, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge excess amounts.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sudha KapoorSudha Kapoor | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| MA NO. 64/2024 in C…MA NO. 64/2024 in CR/991/2023 | Not providedNot provided | Rectification application allowed. Amount deposit…Rectification application allowed. Amount deposited by complainant to be reconsidered. | ["Rectification app…["Rectification application"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The rectification application is allowed. The amount deposited by the complainant shall be considered as Rs.43,03,639/- instead of Rs.30,62,291/-, being an error apparent from record.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ankur SrivastavaAnkur Srivastava | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1586 of 20211586 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Usha Kapur and Vijay Kumar Kapu…The complainants, Usha Kapur and Vijay Kumar Kapur, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not handing over possession of a residential unit despite receiving payment. The HARERA directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | Non-handover of pos…Non-handover of possession of residential unit | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid Rs. 69,74,803/- to the respondent for a residential unit, but the respondent failed to hand over possession despite the due date of 31.08.2019.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons, including force majeure circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount of Rs. 69,74,803/- with interest at the prescribed rate of 10.85% per annum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vijay Kumar KapurVijay Kumar Kapur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1967 of 20231967 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of Rs. 2,30,16,405/…The complainant sought refund of Rs. 2,30,16,405/- with interest for delay in possession of a flat in the Sovereign Park project. The Authority directed the respondents to refund the amount with interest at 10.85% p.a. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Refund"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents delayed possession of the flat beyond the agreed-upon date of 21.08.2018 and sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including force majeure circumstances, and that the complainant was also responsible for the delay.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondents to refund the amount paid by the complainant with interest at 10.85% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ravinder Singh Bham…Ravinder Singh Bhamra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6497 of 20226497 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delay in posse…The complainants sought relief for delay in possession, excess amount collected, illegal maintenance charges, and non-execution of conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay interest for delay, refund excess amount, quash illegal maintenance charges, and execute conveyance deed. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Excess amount collected", "Illegal maintenance charges", "Non-execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed possession, collected excess amount, demanded illegal maintenance charges, and failed to execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to changes in the project, the excess amount was collected as per agreement, and the maintenance charges were as per agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay interest for delay, refund excess amount, quash illegal maintenance charges, and execute conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Subhash ChanderSubhash Chander | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 524/2023524/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed a complaint against the res…The complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for violation of Section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return, handover possession of the unit, and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Real Estate", "As…["Real Estate", "Assured Returns", "Possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay the assured returns and handover possession of the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that they had paid the assured returns till October 2018 and that the complainant was not entitled to the protection of the Act.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the amount of assured return, handover possession of the unit, and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anish VohraAnish Vohra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1873 of 20221873 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Parveen Kharb, filed a complaint…The complainant, Parveen Kharb, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return of Rs. 65/- per sq. ft. up till three years from the date of completion of construction. | ["Real Estate", "As…["Real Estate", "Assured Returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay assured returns as per the agreement dated 19.01.2012.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was not registered with SEBI and therefore, not valid.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured return of Rs. 65/- per sq. ft. up till three years from the date of completion of construction.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Parveen KharbParveen Kharb | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 3800 of 20233800 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought delay possession charges a…The complainant sought delay possession charges and litigation cost from the respondent for not handing over possession of the flat within the agreed-upon time frame. The authority directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not hand over possession of the flat within the agreed-upon time frame of 48 months and sought delay possession charges and litigation cost.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to unforeseen circumstances, including the introduction of a new national highway and changes in the master plan for Gurugram.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Saurabh GuptaSaurabh Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2005 of 20232005 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amo…The complainants sought refund of the paid-up amount against the allotment of the unit as the project has been abandoned by the respondent-builder. The Authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount along with interest. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount", "Abandoned project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the project has been abandoned by the respondent-builder and sought refund of the paid-up amount.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent-builder claimed that the project has not been abandoned and that the delay is due to reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount along with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ripandeep RekhiRipandeep Rekhi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4278 of 20234278 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount against his allotted unit. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Refund of paid-up…["Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount against his allotted unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project had not been abandoned and that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Nishant TimothyNishant Timothy | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6484/2022CR/6484/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Kusum Lata Narula, filed a compl…The complainant, Kusum Lata Narula, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. and Vatika One On One Pvt. Ltd. for delay in possession of a commercial unit in the project 'ONE ON ONE PHASE-1'. | Delay in possession…Delay in possession of commercial unit | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents delayed the possession of the commercial unit and failed to provide the assured return as promised.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainant was an investor and not a consumer, and therefore not entitled to the protection of the Act.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the respondents had violated the provisions of the Act, including section 11(4)(a) and section 13(1), and imposed a token penalty of %1,00,000/- in each complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Kusum Lata NarulaKusum Lata Narula | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 551 of 2023551 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought rectification of order dated 0…Complainant sought rectification of order dated 03.01.2024 for omission of direction regarding maintenance charges. Authority substituted para no. 39 and added direction regarding maintenance charges. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of order", "Maintenance charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought recti…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought rectification of the order dated 03.01.2024 for omission of direction regarding maintenance charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not file any reply to the rectification application.", "final_verdict": "The Authority substituted para no. 39 and added direction regarding maintenance charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajender Kumar GoyalRajender Kumar Goyal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7485/2022CR/7485/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for non-payment of…The complainants sought relief for non-payment of assured returns, non-execution of builder-buyer agreement, and non-handover of physical possession. The authority directed the respondents to pay assured returns, execute the builder-buyer agreement, and hand over physical possession. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Non-execution of builder-buyer agreement", "Non-handover of physical possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondents did not pay assured returns, did not execute the builder-buyer agreement, and did not hand over physical possession of the subject unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that they had paid assured returns till October 2018, but stopped paying due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. They also claimed that the complainants had not executed the builder-buyer agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay assured returns at the agreed rate, execute the builder-buyer agreement, and hand over physical possession of the subject unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Prameshwari SharmaPrameshwari Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4761 of 20224761 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a plot in 2006 and paid mo…The complainant booked a plot in 2006 and paid more than the sale consideration. The respondent failed to hand over possession of the plot despite multiple requests. | ["Failure to hand o…["Failure to hand over possession", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to hand over possession of the plot despite multiple requests and paid more than the sale consideration.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay in possession was due to reasons beyond their control, including the initiation of the GAIL Corridor and non-acquisition of sector roads.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to allot an alternate plot of the same size, similar location, and at the same rate within 2 months and hand over its physical possession after obtaining occupation certificate/completion certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neeru JainNeeru Jain | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1364/2023CR/1364/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured return on monthly …The complainant sought assured return on monthly basis as per the addendum agreement dated 15.07.2010. The respondent was directed to pay the arrears of amount of assured return at agreed rate to the complainant(s) from October 2018. | ["Assured Return", …["Assured Return", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assur…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assured return on monthly basis as per the addendum agreement dated 15.07.2010.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent took a plea of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019, and refused to pay the assured return.", "final_verdict": "The respondent was directed to pay the arrears of amount of assured return at agreed rate to the complainant(s) from October 2018.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Nitin AroraNitin Arora | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 7148 of 20227148 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of amount paid to t…The complainant sought refund of amount paid to the respondent-promoter. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount after deducting 10% of the sale consideration as earnest money and return the remaining amount with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Earnest money"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that he had paid an amount of Rs.16,41,742/- to the respondent-promoter and sought refund of the same.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was a defaulter and had failed to make payment as per the agreed payment plan.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount after deducting 10% of the sale consideration as earnest money and return the remaining amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Om Prakash SinghOm Prakash Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| RERA-PKL-265/2018RERA-PKL-265/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Ruchika Bathla, filed a complain…The complainant, Ruchika Bathla, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for delay in possession of a plot. The Authority directed the respondent to deliver possession and pay interest on the already paid amount. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent delayed possession of the plot and sought interest payment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the possession was delayed due to various reasons and offered to pay interest only from the date of agreement.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to deliver possession and pay interest on the already paid amount at the rate of State Bank of India's highest marginal cost lending rate plus 2% from the date of execution of the buyer's agreement of April 2013 till the actual handing over of possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Naina GabaNaina Gaba | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 50 of 202150 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint for recovery of cost filed against Vati…Complaint for recovery of cost filed against Vatika Ltd. Disposed of after receipt of payment drafts. | ["Recovery of Cost"]["Recovery of Cost"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Recovery of cost …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Recovery of cost of \u20b915000/- payable to the Authority and \u20b922000/- payable to the complainant.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Case disposed of after receipt of payment drafts.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | HRERA PanchkulaHRERA Panchkula | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1037 of 20211037 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants booked a commercial apartment/unit i…Complainants booked a commercial apartment/unit in Vatika Mindscape project. The Authority directed the respondent to execute conveyance deed in favour of the complainants and pay outstanding assured returns along with delay interest. | ["Non-execution of …["Non-execution of conveyance deed", "Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged that the respondent did not execute the conveyance deed in their favour and did not pay the outstanding assured returns.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to the refund as the project was complete and the occupation certificate had been obtained.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainants and pay the outstanding assured returns along with delay interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | AnotherAnother | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1033/20211033/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant booked a commercial apartment in the …Complainant booked a commercial apartment in the 'Vatika Mindscape' project and alleged non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession. The authority ordered the respondent to pay monthly assured returns and hand over possession after obtaining the occupation certificate. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that the respondent did not pay assured returns as per the agreement and delayed possession of the commercial apartment.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee but an investor and that the agreement was only a lease agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority ordered the respondent to pay monthly assured returns to the complainant and hand over possession of the commercial apartment after obtaining the occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anita BhattalAnita Bhattal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 588, 603 & 233 of 2…588, 603 & 233 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants booked commercial units in Vatika Mi…Complainants booked commercial units in Vatika Mindscapes project and alleged non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession. Authority ordered payment of overdue assured returns and delivery of possession after occupation certificate. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants alleged non-pay…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants alleged non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession of commercial units in Vatika Mindscapes project.", "respondent_claim": "Respondents claimed that complainants were not allottees but mere investors and that the agreement was for lease, not sale.", "final_verdict": "Authority ordered payment of overdue assured returns and delivery of possession after occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shivani BansalShivani Bansal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 588, 603, 233 of 20…588, 603, 233 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants booked commercial units in Vatika Mi…Complainants booked commercial units in Vatika Mindscapes project and alleged non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession. Authority ordered possession to be handed over after occupation certificate and payment of overdue returns. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants alleged non-pay…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants alleged non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession of commercial units in Vatika Mindscapes project.", "respondent_claim": "Respondents claimed that complainants were not allottees but investors and that the agreement was for lease purposes only.", "final_verdict": "Authority ordered possession to be handed over after occupation certificate and payment of overdue returns.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shivani BansalShivani Bansal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1394 of 20211394 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant booked a commercial unit from respond…Complainant booked a commercial unit from respondent and alleged non-payment of assured returns. Authority ordered possession of the unit and payment of overdue assured returns. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Possession of commercial unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant alleged non-paym…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant alleged non-payment of assured returns by respondent and sought possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that complainant was not an allottee but an investor and that payment of assured returns was prohibited by law.", "final_verdict": "Authority ordered possession of the commercial unit to be delivered by respondent to complainant after obtaining occupation certificate. Complainant was entitled to agreed monthly assured returns until lawful offer of possession was made.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Akansha SharmaAkansha Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 558 of 2022558 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Sudhanshu Dutt filed a complaint agai…Complainant Sudhanshu Dutt filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not paying assured returns and not completing the project. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority directed the respondent to pay the complainant the outstanding assured returns and interest. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns and non-completion of project | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that the respondent did not pay assured returns as per the agreement and did not complete the project despite receiving occupation certificate.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee but an investor and that the agreement was not a builder-buyer agreement but an investment agreement.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to pay the complainant the outstanding assured returns and interest and to complete the project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sudhanshu DuttSudhanshu Dutt | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1288 of 20211288 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought payment of assured returns an…Complainants sought payment of assured returns and possession of commercial unit. Authority directed payment of assured returns and possession of unit after occupation certificate. | ["Payment of Assure…["Payment of Assured Returns", "Possession of Commercial Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought payment …{"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought payment of assured returns and possession of commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that complainants were not allottees but investors, and that payment of assured returns was prohibited by the BUDS Act.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed payment of assured returns and possession of unit after occupation certificate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anureet BainsAnureet Bains | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 836, 837, 838, 839 …836, 837, 838, 839 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants withdrew from the project and so…The complainants withdrew from the project and sought refund of the paid amount along with interest. The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amounts with interest at the rate of 10.60%. | ["Refund of paid am…["Refund of paid amount", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants withdrew fr…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants withdrew from the project and sought refund of the paid amount along with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were speculative buyers who invested in the project for monetary returns.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to refund the amounts with interest at the rate of 10.60%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajat GuptaRajat Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 843 of 2021843 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund of investment and assur…Complainant sought refund of investment and assured returns for commercial units in the project 'Vatika Mindscapes'. Authority directed refund of investment with interest and compensation for delay in possession. | ["Refund of Investm…["Refund of Investment", "Assured Returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of investment and assured returns for commercial units in the project 'Vatika Mindscapes'.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that complainant was a speculative buyer and not entitled to protection under RERA Act.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund of investment with interest and compensation for delay in possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Hamina KangHamina Kang | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1207 of 20191207 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund of amount deposited alo…Complainant sought refund of amount deposited along with interest in terms of Section 18 of Act of 2016. Authority directed respondent to refund the paid amount of ₹11,36,806/- along with interest at the rate prescribed in Rule 15 of Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount deposited", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of amount deposited along with interest in terms of Section 18 of Act of 2016.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that the agreement for sale/plot buyer agreement was entered into between the original allottee and the respondent on 26.04.2011, and that the complainant had not fulfilled his obligations towards the payment.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed respondent to refund the paid amount of \u20b911,36,806/- along with interest at the rate prescribed in Rule 15 of Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ram Darshan BhatiaRam Darshan Bhatia | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 845/2022845/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of paid amount along w…Complainants sought refund of paid amount along with interest and compensation for delayed delivery of possession. Authority directed refund of paid amount with interest at the rate of 10.75%. | ["Refund of paid am…["Refund of paid amount", "Interest", "Compensation"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed that th…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants claimed that they had paid the full amount of Rs. 44,83,050/- and that the respondent had failed to deliver possession of the unit within the agreed-upon time frame.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that the complainants were speculative buyers who had invested in the project for monetary gains and that the respondent had paid assured returns till October, 2018.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund of paid amount with interest at the rate of 10.75%.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Renu ChandelRenu Chandel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 713 of 2023713 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn/settled between parties. Case…Complaint withdrawn/settled between parties. Case disposed of as withdrawn. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Case disposed of as withdrawn/settled.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anr.Anr. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 711 of 2023711 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Dispute settled between parties, settlement deed …Dispute settled between parties, settlement deed executed on 26.07.2023. Case disposed as settled. | ["Dispute settlemen…["Dispute settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Case disposed as settled based on settlement deed executed on 26.07.2023.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Subhendu SurSubhendu Sur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 259/2019Appeal No. 259/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant sought interest on the amount refun…The appellant sought interest on the amount refunded by the respondent. The appeal was disposed of with a modification to grant interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Interest on Refun…["Interest on Refund"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant cla…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant claimed that they were entitled to interest on the amount refunded by the respondent.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent conceded the appellant's plea and stated that they had no objection to granting interest at the prescribed rate.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was disposed of with a modification to grant interest at the prescribed rate of 10.20% p.a. on the amount of refund from the date of filing the complaint till realization.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Abhishekh GuptaAbhishekh Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 620 of 2021620 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant's application for recalling an earl…The appellant's application for recalling an earlier order was summarily rejected without a hearing. The appeal was disposed of by directing the authority to reconsider the application with a proper hearing. | ["Recall of earlier…["Recall of earlier order", "Proper hearing"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant cla…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant claimed that their application for recalling an earlier order was summarily rejected without a hearing.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondents did not make any claims in the appeal.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was disposed of by directing the authority to reconsider the application with a proper hearing.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sangeeta GuptaSangeeta Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 27 of 20…Appeal No. 27 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amic…The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties. The settlement agreement dated 22.11.2022 shall form the part of this order. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Raj Kumar SinghalRaj Kumar Singhal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 175 of 2…Appeal No. 175 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amic…The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties. The settlement agreement dated 01.09.2022 shall form the part of this order. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Inder Singh RanaInder Singh Rana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 176 of 2…Appeal No. 176 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amic…The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties. The settlement agreement dated 24.06.2022 shall form the part of this order. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was disposed of as a result of an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sandeep TomarSandeep Tomar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 479 of 2…Appeal No. 479 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and th…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and the tribunal dismissed it as such. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Siddhant KhemkaMr. Siddhant Khemka | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 396 of 2…Appeal No. 396 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and th…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and the tribunal dismissed it as such. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mr. Abhinav KothiwalMr. Abhinav Kothiwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 210 of 2…Appeal No. 210 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Aashish Sardana's appeal against Vatika Limited w…Aashish Sardana's appeal against Vatika Limited was dismissed as withdrawn. The competent authority was directed to expedite proceedings for compensation. | ["Compensation", "H…["Compensation", "Harassment"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Aashish Sardana c…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Aashish Sardana claimed that penal action and/or compensation should have been taken against Vatika Limited for harassment. He sought adequate compensation for the long period of harassment.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The competent authority was directed to expedite proceedings for compensation and conclude the same within four months.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Aashish SardanaAashish Sardana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 892 of 2022 (O&M)892 of 2022 (O&M) | HaryanaHaryana | The case was dismissed for want of prosecution as…The case was dismissed for want of prosecution as none of the parties appeared for the hearing. | Want of prosecutionWant of prosecution | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The case was dismissed for want of prosecution.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shikha GuptaShikha Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4573/2022CR/4573/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Sancho Josef vs VATIKA LIMITED: Complaint withdra…Sancho Josef vs VATIKA LIMITED: Complaint withdrawn by the complainant. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant w…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant wished to withdraw the complaint.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not applicable as the respondent did not make any claims.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sancho JosefSancho Josef | VATIKA LIMITEDVATIKA LIMITED | Link |
| MA NO, 199/2023 in …MA NO, 199/2023 in CR/887/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed an application for rectific…The complainant filed an application for rectification of order dated 20.01.2023 for correction of amount paid by the complainants to the respondent. The authority allowed the rectification and corrected the total amount to be refunded to the complainants. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of order", "Correction of amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the amount paid by them to the respondent was incorrect and sought rectification of the order dated 20.01.2023.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not have any claim.", "final_verdict": "The authority allowed the rectification and corrected the total amount to be refunded to the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sanjay VermaSanjay Verma | VATIKA LIMITEDVATIKA LIMITED | Link |
| 2970 of 20212970 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for non-payment of…The complainants sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondents. The authority directed the respondents to pay the arrears of assured returns and outstanding amounts. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondents failed to pay assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainants were not entitled to assured returns as they were not genuine buyers.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay the arrears of assured returns and outstanding amounts.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Late Mr. Devinder M…Late Mr. Devinder Mehra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4722 of 20204722 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of Rs. 1,83,37,724…The complainants sought refund of Rs. 1,83,37,724/- with interest for delayed possession of a flat in the 'Sovereign Next' project. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount with interest. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed possession"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants booked a flat in the 'Sovereign Next' project and paid Rs. 1,83,37,724/-. They sought refund with interest for delayed possession beyond the agreed date of 24.12.2015.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent denied all allegations and claimed that the complainants had not made payments in time. They argued that the delay was due to various reasons, including NGT notifications and the Covid-19 pandemic.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount of Rs. 1,83,37,724/- with interest at the rate of 9.80% from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Gipsy MathuGipsy Mathu | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3/2020CR/3/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Akhil Madan and Shruti Madan, fi…The complainant, Akhil Madan and Shruti Madan, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not paying the full amount as per the settlement agreement. The matter was disposed off with directions to the respondent to clear the outstanding dues within 4 weeks. | ["Settlement Agreem…["Settlement Agreement", "Payment Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that only Rs. 30,00,000/- has been received and the balance is yet to be paid by the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that settlement deed has already been signed with the complainant on 14.03.2022 and only Rs. 22,66,900/- is left to be paid.", "final_verdict": "The matter was disposed off with directions to the respondent to clear the outstanding dues within 4 weeks.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shruti MadanShruti Madan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 358 of 2020358 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund of paid amount for und…Complainants sought refund of paid amount for undelivered flat. Authority directed refund with interest. | ["Refund for undeli…["Refund for undelivered flat"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought refund o…{"appellant_claim": "Complainants sought refund of paid amount for undelivered flat.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed delay due to various reasons, including force majeure.", "final_verdict": "Authority directed refund of paid amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Neena DhimanNeena Dhiman | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| MA NO. 379/2023 in …MA NO. 379/2023 in CR/6941/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint was heard and disposed of allowing refu…Complaint was heard and disposed of allowing refund of amount paid with interest. Rectification application for missing name in order was also allowed. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Rectification of order"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants sought refund of the amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority allowed refund of the entire amount paid with prescribed rate of interest and also allowed rectification of the order for missing name.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ajay SinghAjay Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2016/20222016/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for delayed posses…The complainants sought relief for delayed possession of a residential plot in the Emilia project developed by the respondent. The Authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the agreement to hand over possession within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges. | ["Delayed possessio…["Delayed possession", "Non-compliance with agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had failed to hand over possession of the residential plot within the stipulated period and sought relief for delayed possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants had failed to make timely payments and that the delay in possession was due to the complainants' default.", "final_verdict": "The Authority found that the respondent had failed to comply with the agreement to hand over possession within the stipulated period and directed the respondent to pay delayed possession charges.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Pardeep SinghPardeep Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 7337 of 20227337 of 2022 | GURUGRAMGURUGRAM | The complainants sought relief for non-payment of…The complainants sought relief for non-payment of assured returns, delay in possession, and non-execution of the conveyance deed. The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the builder-buyer agreement. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Delay in possession", "Non-execution of conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns, delayed possession, and did not execute the conveyance deed.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to assured returns, that possession was given, and that the conveyance deed was not executed due to lack of occupation certificate.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay assured returns, execute the conveyance deed, and not charge anything not part of the builder-buyer agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sunil MohanSunil Mohan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 960 of 2022960 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought possession of a commercial un…Complainants sought possession of a commercial unit, assured returns, and delay penalty charges. Authority directed the respondent to offer possession, execute conveyance deed, and pay outstanding assured returns. | ["Possession of com…["Possession of commercial unit", "Assured returns", "Delay penalty charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought poss…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants sought possession of a commercial unit, assured returns, and delay penalty charges.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were not entitled to the relief sought.", "final_verdict": "The Authority directed the respondent to offer possession, execute conveyance deed, and pay outstanding assured returns.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sangeeta DhingraSangeeta Dhingra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 894 of 2020894 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid with interest for a delayed real estate project. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delayed real esta…["Delayed real estate project", "Refund with interest"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a significant amount for a real estate project that was delayed beyond the agreed-upon date of possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to unforeseen circumstances, including the COVID-19 pandemic, and that they had paid assured returns to the complainants.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants with interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | RavinderRavinder | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1861/2022CR/1861/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns on a comme…The complainant sought assured returns on a commercial unit from the respondent, Vatika Limited. The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured return and outstanding accrued amount. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Commercial Unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assur…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assured returns on a commercial unit from the respondent, Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal and that they had not obtained registration from SEBI.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the arrears of assured return and outstanding accrued amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | GS Johar & SonsGS Johar & Sons | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 606 of 2021606 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought relief of possession along wit…Complainant sought relief of possession along with delay interest for a residential plot in the project of respondent. Authority quashed the termination of the plot and directed the respondent to make a fresh offer of possession along with payment of delay interest. | ["Invalid terminati…["Invalid termination of plot", "Delay in possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that the respondent had not completed the project and had failed to give a valid offer of possession. The complainant sought relief of possession along with delay interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that an offer of possession was made to the complainant vide letter dated 12.10.2015, but the complainant did not come forward to take possession. The respondent claimed that the allotment was cancelled vide termination letter dated 27.05.2016 and a cheque of Rs. 15,53,383/- was sent to the complainant.", "final_verdict": "The Authority quashed the termination of the plot and directed the respondent to make a fresh offer of possession along with payment of delay interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Naresh KumarNaresh Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4291 of 20224291 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a villa in the project of…The complainants booked a villa in the project of the respondent and filed a complaint for delay in possession. The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plot/units to the complainants at the same rate and pay interest at the prescribed rate. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Interest payment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the possession of the villa and sought compensation.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to various reasons including the passing of GAIL pipeline over the allotted area.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to provide alternative plot/units to the complainants at the same rate and pay interest at the prescribed rate.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Mrs. Jaya VanjaniMrs. Jaya Vanjani | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1572 of 20231572 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the amount paid…The complainants sought refund of the amount paid by them to the respondent for a residential apartment in the 'Turning Point' project, which was found to be abandoned by the authority. | ["Abandoned project…["Abandoned project", "Refund of amount paid"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had abandoned the project and sought refund of the amount paid by them.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the delay was due to reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority found that the project was abandoned and directed the respondent to refund the amount paid by the complainants.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Divya TiwariDivya Tiwari | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1002 of 20211002 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the amount paid …The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him in respect of a subject unit along with interest. The authority held that the promoter is liable to return to the complainant the amount paid by him with interest. | ["Refund of amount …["Refund of amount paid", "Interest"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought refund of the amount paid by him in respect of a subject unit along with interest.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant is an investor and not entitled to the protection of the Act.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority held that the promoter is liable to return to the complainant the amount paid by him with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Manohar KheraManohar Khera | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1865 of 20221865 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Manju Singh Parmar and Sanjay K…The complainants, Manju Singh Parmar and Sanjay Kumar Tanwar, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. and Vatika One Express City Pvt Ltd. for violation of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondents to refund the amount received from the complainants along with interest. | Refund of amount pa…Refund of amount paid by complainants | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they had paid a total amount of Rs. 21,59,310/- to the respondents, but the respondents failed to complete the project and hand over the possession of the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons, including the introduction of a new National Highway.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to refund the amount received from the complainants along with interest at the rate of 10.75% p.a.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sanjay Kumar TanwarSanjay Kumar Tanwar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/173/2021CR/173/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund and compensation fo…The complainant sought refund and compensation for the non-development of the project by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest. | ["Non-development o…["Non-development of project", "Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to develop the project and sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons, including force majeure circumstances.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Ashish Kumar Aggarw…Ashish Kumar Aggarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2071/2022CR/2071/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought refund of the total amoun…The complainants sought refund of the total amount paid with interest as the project was abandoned by the respondent-builder. The authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount with interest and adjust the assured returns paid to the allottees. | ["Project abandonme…["Project abandonment", "Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the project was abandoned by the respondent-builder and sought refund of the total amount paid with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent-builder claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainants were not entitled to refund.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent-builder to refund the paid-up amount with interest and adjust the assured returns paid to the allottees.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | VijaylaxmiVijaylaxmi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/220/2022CR/220/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund for a residential u…The complainant sought refund for a residential unit in the 'Turning Point' project developed by Vatika Limited, alleging non-delivery of possession and abandonment of the project. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Project abandonment"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged that the respondent failed to deliver possession of the residential unit and abandoned the project, seeking refund of the paid amount.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was delayed due to various reasons, including force majeure circumstances, and that the complainants were not entitled to refund as they were investors and not consumers.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid amount with interest and clear the loan amounts of financial institutions, finding that the project had been abandoned and no progress was made.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Deepti BassiDeepti Bassi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4558/2022CR/4558/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The case was settled amicably between the parties…The case was settled amicably between the parties, and a settlement deed was filed. The authority directed the respondent to clarify the adherence to the settlement terms. | ["Settlement Deed",…["Settlement Deed", "Adherence to Terms"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The case was settled amicably, and the settlement deed was filed. The authority directed the respondent to clarify the adherence to the settlement terms.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sunil GuptaSunil Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1545 of 20191545 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought rectification of earlier order…Complainant sought rectification of earlier order regarding allotment of new unit at same price. Authority clarified that new unit should be allotted at same price as original agreement. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of earlier order", "Allotment of new unit"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought rectification of the earlier order dated 25.08.2021, claiming that the direction to allot a new unit at prevailing market rates was not in accordance with the original agreement. The complainant argued that the prices of property had increased significantly from 2011 to 2021 and that the respondent-builder was at fault for not handing over possession of the original unit.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent argued that the complainant's application was not maintainable as it sought review of the earlier order, which was not permissible under the Act. The respondent also claimed that the complainant had been offered an alternative unit at prevailing market rates and that the prices of property had increased due to inflation.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The Authority clarified that the new unit should be allotted to the complainant at the same price as per the terms and conditions of the original buyer's agreement. The Authority observed that the prices of property had increased significantly from 2011 to 2021 and that the respondent-builder was at fault for not handing over possession of the original unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Rajendera KumarRajendera Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1464 of 20211464 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund for a commercial un…The complainant sought refund for a commercial unit booked with the respondent. The authority held that the respondent should have refunded the amount paid by the complainant after deducting 10% of the sale consideration as earnest money. | ["Refund for commer…["Refund for commercial unit", "Earnest money"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refun…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought refund for a commercial unit booked with the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had not paid the full amount as per the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the respondent should have refunded the amount paid by the complainant after deducting 10% of the sale consideration as earnest money.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Shri Rajesh KumarShri Rajesh Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1168 of 20231168 of 2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amou…The complainant sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest for the abandoned project. The authority directed the respondent to refund the amount with interest. | ["Abandoned project…["Abandoned project", "Refund of paid-up amount"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the project was abandoned and sought refund of the paid-up amount with interest.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was not abandoned and that the complainant had not paid the full amount.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the paid-up amount with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Sumit KumarSumit Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 2227 of 20222227 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief against the respon…The complainants sought relief against the respondent for delay in execution of the conveyance deed and increased stamp duty charges. The authority directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed within 3 months and comply with the directions. | ["Delay in executio…["Delay in execution of conveyance deed", "Increased stamp duty charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent delayed the execution of the conveyance deed and charged increased stamp duty rates.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the delay was due to force majeure circumstances and that the increased stamp duty rates were beyond their control.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to execute the conveyance deed within 3 months and comply with the directions.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Narendra Pal SharmaNarendra Pal Sharma | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
Cases Lost by Builder (When Filing)
Cases where the builder sued others but didn't win. Includes summaries and key takeaways.
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Non-compliance with Regulatory Requirements
Failure to Make Pre-deposits
Jurisdictional Disputes
Disputes over Payments and Possession
Withdrawal of Appeals
The analysis of the cases filed by the builder VATIKA LIMITED, which resulted in losses, reveals several interesting insights about their legal disputes and overall operational challenges.
Upon grouping the cases by common themes, we observe that many disputes fall into specific categories. Firstly, Non-compliance with Regulatory Requirements is a recurrent theme, particularly concerning the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. In multiple instances, the builder failed to make necessary pre-deposits as mandated by the law, leading to the dismissal of their appeals. This indicates a potential oversight or lack of understanding of regulatory compliance.
Another theme that emerges is Jurisdictional Disputes, where the builder contended that the Adjudicating Officer lacked the necessary authority to handle certain cases. Despite these claims, the outcomes consistently showed that the Tribunal upheld the decisions made by the officers, suggesting a need for clearer legal guidance when navigating jurisdictional issues.
Additionally, cases involving Disputes over Payments and Possession highlight the builder's challenges in managing client expectations regarding possession of properties. For instance, there were conflicts concerning the payment status against plot possession, where the builder faced claims from clients dissatisfied with the handling of their properties.
Withdrawal of Appeals is also noteworthy, where cases were dismissed due to the builder not pursuing proceedings or failing to comply with pre-deposit requirements. This raises questions about their commitment to resolving legal disputes and further indicates operational inefficiencies.
Examining the reasons for litigation, VATIKA LIMITED commonly appeared in court to contest penalties or assert claims of jurisdiction regarding execution proceedings. Another frequent trigger for legal action stemmed from disputes over the inability to deliver possession, often attributed to external factors like land realignment or infrastructure delays.
The common reasons for the builder's losses can primarily be attributed to their insufficient evidence and failure to meet legal prerequisites, such as making mandated pre-deposits. Additionally, the trends suggest that misunderstandings regarding land classification and project execution responsibilities exacerbated their legal troubles. Overall, this analysis underscores the need for VATIKA LIMITED to enhance regulatory compliance, improve their understanding of legal frameworks, and refine their operational processes to mitigate future disputes effectively.
This table provides details of individual cases contributing to the summary above. Click rows to expand content. Use "Show More/Less" buttons below.
| Case No. | State | Summary | Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant | Respondent | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 497 of 2022497 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant, M/s Vatika Limited, challenged the…The appellant, M/s Vatika Limited, challenged the impugned order dated 22.04.2022, passed by the learned Adjudicating Officer of Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram, which directed the arrest of the directors of the appellant. | ["Jurisdiction of A…["Jurisdiction of Adjudicating Officer", "Delegation of Powers"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the impugned order was without jurisdiction as the learned Adjudicating Officer was not legally empowered to execute the order dated 10.01.2019.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the learned Authority was legally competent to delegate its powers to the learned Adjudicating Officer to execute its order for refund.", "final_verdict": "The Tribunal held that the learned Adjudicating Officer was legally entitled to pass the impugned order and the appeal was dismissed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Girdhari LalGirdhari Lal | Link |
| 359 of 2021359 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant's appeal is dismissed as they have …The appellant's appeal is dismissed as they have not complied with the proviso to Sections 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016. | ["Non-compliance wi…["Non-compliance with proviso"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal is dismissed as the appellant has not complied with the proviso to Sections 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | MS. Ashmia AhlawatMS. Ashmia Ahlawat | Link |
| Appeal No.122 of 20…Appeal No.122 of 2023 (O&M) | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed …The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make the pre-deposit mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. | ["Real Estate Appea…["Real Estate Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make the pre-deposit mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Namita MehtaNamita Mehta | Link |
| 124 of 2023 (O&M)124 of 2023 (O&M) | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed …The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make the pre-deposit as mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. | ["Real Estate Appea…["Real Estate Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make the pre-deposit as mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Namita MehtaNamita Mehta | Link |
| Appeal No.123 of 20…Appeal No.123 of 2023 (O&M) | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as the pre-deposit manda…The appeal was dismissed as the pre-deposit mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was not made. The appellant did not provide instructions for the pre-deposit. | ["Real Estate Appea…["Real Estate Appeal", "Pre-deposit"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as the pre-deposit mandated by the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 was not made.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Namita MehtaNamita Mehta | Link |
| 48 of 2023 (O&M)48 of 2023 (O&M) | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The promot…The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The promoter was not imposed costs despite not making pre-deposit and not pursuing the proceedings. | ["Withdrawn Appeal"]["Withdrawn Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant cla…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant claimed that they had instructions to withdraw the appeal.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the appellant had not made pre-deposit and had not pursued the proceedings.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn. The promoter was not imposed costs despite not making pre-deposit and not pursuing the proceedings.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Arvind GargArvind Garg | Link |
| Appeals No.730 and …Appeals No.730 and 803 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant, M/s Vatika Ltd., filed an appeal a…The appellant, M/s Vatika Ltd., filed an appeal against the impugned order dated 03.11.2020 passed by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, seeking possession of a plot and delay possession interest. The appellant claimed that the plot was not available due to realignment of the project caused by the GAIL Corridor and non-shifting of defunct High Tension lines. | Real estate disputeReal estate dispute | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the plot was not available due to realignment of the project caused by the GAIL Corridor and non-shifting of defunct High Tension lines.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the appellant had failed to deliver possession of the plot despite payment of the full sale consideration.", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed, and the amount of Rs.24,68,678/- deposited by the appellant with the Tribunal as pre-deposit was sent to the Authority for disbursement to the respondent.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Vikram YadavVikram Yadav | Link |
| Appeal No. 730 of 2…Appeal No. 730 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant, M/s Vatika Ltd., contested the imp…The appellant, M/s Vatika Ltd., contested the impugned order passed by the Authority, claiming that the respondent, Vikram Yadav, had concealed material facts and sought possession of a plot that had been re-allotted to him. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the appellant's claims. | Real estate disputeReal estate dispute | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the respondent had concealed material facts and sought possession of a plot that had been re-allotted to him.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that he had paid an amount of Rs. 25,92,000/- against the total sale consideration of Rs 43,90,652.80 and sought possession of the original plot.", "final_verdict": "The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the appellant's claims.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Vikram YadavVikram Yadav | Link |
| 661 of 2022661 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant challenged the order of the Haryana…The appellant challenged the order of the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, which attached two bank accounts of the appellant-promoter. The appellate tribunal upheld the order, finding no legal infirmity. | ["Real Estate", "At…["Real Estate", "Attached Bank Accounts"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the Adjudicating Officer had no jurisdiction to entertain the execution proceedings and pass the order.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the appellant had failed to make a pre-deposit in terms of proviso to Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "final_verdict": "The appellate tribunal upheld the order of the Adjudicating Officer, finding no legal infirmity.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Ms. Namita MehtaMs. Namita Mehta | Link |
| 669 of 2022669 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant challenged the order of the Haryana…The appellant challenged the order of the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, but the appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make a pre-deposit in terms of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. | ["Real Estate", "Ap…["Real Estate", "Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the Adjudicating Officer had no jurisdiction to entertain the execution proceedings and pass the order.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the appellant had failed to make a pre-deposit in terms of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as the appellant failed to make a pre-deposit in terms of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Ms. Namita MehtaMs. Namita Mehta | Link |
Cases Won by Builder (When Filing)
Cases where the builder sued others and won. Includes summaries and key insights.
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Delayed Possession Claims
Assured Returns Disputes
Claims for Refunds
Execution of Agreements and Conveyance Deeds
Regulatory Compliance Issues
Disputes Over Development Delays
An analysis of the cases filed by the builder VATIKA LIMITED, which it won, revealed a myriad of recurring themes that illuminate the nature of disputes encountered and the outcomes of these legal battles.
Delayed Possession Claims
A significant number of cases revolved around delayed possession. Complainants often alleged that the builder failed to hand over property within the agreed timeframe. In these situations, VATIKA LIMITED managed to successfully defend its position, demonstrating that delays were frequently caused by the buyers' defaults or other external factors like regulatory restrictions.
Assured Returns Disputes
Many cases focused on the builder's alleged failure to pay assured returns as stipulated in the agreements. VATIKA LIMITED contested these claims robustly, often arguing against the respondents' status as genuine buyers and highlighting misunderstandings regarding the nature of the agreements. The outcomes often favored VATIKA, who was directed to pay dues when the claims were found valid, indicating a complex interpretation of these agreements in various contexts.
Claims for Refunds
Another theme was the request for refunds from buyers who claimed non-delivery or delays in projects. In these instances, the builder successfully argued, at times, demonstrating the undelivered flats were due to external circumstances and that timely payments were crucial for project completion.
Execution of Agreements and Conveyance Deeds
Several disputes dealt with the execution of agreements and conveyance deeds, where complainants felt the builder failed to comply within specified timeframes. VATIKA LIMITED’s arguments often cited the buyers' payment defaults and external regulatory hurdles, helping the builder maintain favorable verdicts in these cases.
Regulatory Compliance Issues and Disputes Over Development Delays
There were also disputes related to regulatory compliance, where the builder faced accusations of not adhering to local laws. However, VATIKA LIMITED was able to demonstrate compliance and valid reasoning for delays, including force majeure events and other unforeseen circumstances.
The analysis showcases a pattern where VATIKA LIMITED frequently contended with claims that were sometimes exaggerated or based on misunderstandings. The builders often emerged victorious due to strong arguments highlighting non-compliance from the complainants' side, lack of sufficient evidence, or regulatory compliance on their part. These trends shed light on the importance of contractual adherence and communication between builders and buyers.
The findings suggest that VATIKA LIMITED maintains a solid reputation in the real estate market, effectively defending against claims that may not always have substantial merit. This illustrates a broader trend in the market where buyers might sometimes make unfounded accusations, leading to potential legal battles.
For potential buyers, it’s crucial to approach decisions in the real estate market with diligence. While valid disputes do arise, this analysis of VATIKA LIMITED’s victories underscores that reputable builders can effectively protect themselves from unjust claims. Engaging in thorough research and obtaining reliable information about builders can equip buyers to navigate the complexities of real estate transactions more confidently.
This table provides details of individual cases contributing to the summary above. Click rows to expand content. Use "Show More/Less" buttons below.
| Case No. | State | Summary | Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant | Respondent | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2332 of 20212332 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought assured returns from the r…The complainant sought assured returns from the respondent, but the respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019. The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns as per the agreement. | Assured ReturnsAssured Returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assur…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought assured returns from the respondent, but the respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured return scheme was illegal due to the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the assured returns as per the agreement.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anu MehtaAnu Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1119 of 20211119 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Anu Mehta, filed a complaint aga…The complainant, Anu Mehta, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority directed the respondents to handover the possession to the complainant, pay the amount of assured return, and execute the conveyance deed. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents failed to pay the assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the assured return scheme was banned by the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondents to pay the amount of assured return and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anu MehtaAnu Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1118 of 20211118 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Anu Mehta, filed a complaint aga…The complainant, Anu Mehta, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited and Gautam Bhalla for non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession of a commercial unit. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HARERA) directed the respondents to pay the assured returns and hand over possession of the unit. | Non-payment of assu…Non-payment of assured returns and delay in possession | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondents failed to pay assured returns and delay in possession of the commercial unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the complainant was not an allottee and therefore not entitled to assured returns.", "final_verdict": "The HARERA directed the respondents to pay the assured returns and hand over possession of the unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anu MehtaAnu Mehta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 6376 of 20196376 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Sev…The complainant booked a unit in the project 'Seven Elements' developed by M/s Vatika Limited for a total sale consideration of Rs. 1,22,75,355/-. The complainant made a payment of Rs. 19,10,944/-. The respondent assured the complainant to handover the said unit within 48 months from the date of the booking and also assured that the builder buyer agreement in respect of the booked unit would be executed within 5 months from the booking of the unit. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Non-execution of builder buyer agreement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to execute the builder buyer agreement within 5 months from the booking of the unit and also failed to handover the possession of the unit within 48 months from the date of booking.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project 'Seven Elements' is being developed by M/s Vatika Seven Elements Pvt. Ltd. which is not impleaded as a party. The respondent further pleaded that the complainant has failed to make payments on time.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to refund the entire amount of Rs. 19,10,944/- paid by the complainant along with prescribed rate of interest @ 9.80% p.a. as prescribed under rule 15 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 from the date of each payment till the actual date of refund of the amount.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anil Kumar DeswalAnil Kumar Deswal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 47160f202047160f2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought refund for delayed project an…Complainants sought refund for delayed project and compensation for mental harassment. Authority directed refund with interest and compensation for mental harassment. | ["Refund for delaye…["Refund for delayed project", "Compensation for mental harassment"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Complainants soug…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Complainants sought refund for delayed project and compensation for mental harassment.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Respondent claimed that delays were due to various reasons beyond their control.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Authority directed refund with interest and compensation for mental harassment.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anita MunshiAnita Munshi | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 986 of 2022986 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants booked a unit in the project and…The complainants booked a unit in the project and paid a part of the consideration. The respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession. The authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainants with interest. | ["Non-completion of…["Non-completion of project", "Failure to hand over possession"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that they booked a unit in the project and paid a part of the consideration. They alleged that the respondent failed to complete the project and hand over possession.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants were habitual defaulters in payment and failed to adhere to the payment plan.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to return the amount paid by the complainants with interest.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Isha MadhanIsha Madhan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4777 of 20224777 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant sought relief for non-payment of …The complainant sought relief for non-payment of assured returns by the respondent. The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed. | ["Non-payment of as…["Non-payment of assured returns", "Conveyance deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent failed to pay the assured returns as per the agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the assured returns were not payable as per the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019.", "final_verdict": "The authority directed the respondent to pay the outstanding assured return amount and execute the conveyance deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anju MalikAnju Malik | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1969 of 20191969 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Anita Dewan, filed a complaint a…The complainant, Anita Dewan, filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited and another for various charges. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) passed an order directing the respondent to pay the balance amount to the complainant. | ["Real Estate", "Ch…["Real Estate", "Charges"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had charged her various amounts, including EDC, Additional EDC, and interest on delayed payment of installments.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had been charged correctly and that the amounts were payable.", "final_verdict": "The HRERA directed the respondent to pay the balance amount to the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Anita DewanAnita Dewan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No.496 of 20…Appeal No.496 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant, M/s Vatika Limited, challenged the…The appellant, M/s Vatika Limited, challenged the impugned order dated 12.05.2022 passed by the learned Adjudicating Officer of Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram, which directed the arrest of the directors of the appellant. | ["Real Estate", "Ar…["Real Estate", "Arrest of Directors"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the impugned order was without jurisdiction and that the learned Adjudicating Officer was not legally empowered to execute the order dated 10.01.2019.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the learned Adjudicating Officer was legally entitled to pass the impugned order and that the appellant had not paid the decreetal amount.", "final_verdict": "The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. The learned Adjudicating Officer was directed to adjudicate upon the amount of interest, which, if any, the appellant was liable to pay to the respondent.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Girdhari LalGirdhari Lal | Link |
| Appeal No. 759 of 2…Appeal No. 759 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant withdrew the appeal after the adjud…The appellant withdrew the appeal after the adjudicating officer recalled the order directing arrest of the directors of the promoter company. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant sought to with…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal after the adjudicating officer recalled the order directing arrest of the directors of the promoter company.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent did not controvert the fact that the appellant withdrew the appeal.", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Vijay WadhwaVijay Wadhwa | Link |
| 343 of 2021343 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Tanya Mahajan, filed a complaint…The complainant, Tanya Mahajan, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. for not paying assured returns and not completing the project. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) ordered the respondent to pay the complainant the outstanding assured returns and to complete the project. | ["Assured returns",…["Assured returns", "Project completion"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent did not pay assured returns and did not complete the project.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant was not an allottee and therefore not entitled to assured returns.", "final_verdict": "The HRERA ordered the respondent to pay the complainant the outstanding assured returns and to complete the project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "no"} | Tanya MahajanTanya Mahajan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
Cases Won by Builder (When Defending)
Cases where others sued the builder, but the builder won. Includes summaries and key insights.
Yearly Trend for these Cases
Common Topics
Delayed Possession Claims
Settlement and Withdrawn Complaints
Disputed Payments and Refunds
Project Registration and Compliance
Jurisdictional Issues
An analysis of the cases filed against the builder, VATIKA LIMITED, which the builder won, revealed the following information.
The cases present a diverse array of disputes primarily categorized into several key themes:
- Delayed Possession Claims: A number of cases highlighted complaints regarding delayed possession of booked units, with some claimants alleging that the builder failed to hand over possession by specified deadlines. However, the builder successfully defended itself by showing that these complaints were not maintainable, as they were sometimes specific to multiple units that needed individual adjudication.
- Settlement and Withdrawn Complaints: There are numerous instances where complaints were withdrawn due to amicable settlements or mutual agreements between the parties involved. This indicates a trend where many disputes are resolved outside of court, showcasing the builder’s ability to negotiate or settle disputes directly, thus preventing extended legal battles.
- Disputed Payments and Refunds: Several claims revolved around financial disputes, including requests for refunds or compensation. In these cases, VATIKA LIMITED successfully argued that the complainants had either failed to make necessary payments or that their contracts did not support their claims for reimbursements. This indicates that the builder maintained clear financial practices and compliance with payment schedules.
- Project Registration and Compliance: Some disputes involved allegations that VATIKA LIMITED had failed to register its projects according to regulatory requirements. In these cases, the builder generally demonstrated that their projects were either not ongoing or complied with the necessary regulations, leading to complaints being dismissed. This also reflects well on the builder's operational practices regarding statutory requirements.
- Jurisdictional Issues: In many complaints, the authority found that the cases did not fall under its jurisdiction, underscoring the importance of proper legal channels in real estate disputes. This highlights a recurring misunderstanding among complainants regarding where and how to file their grievances, illustrating the builder’s competence in navigating regulatory frameworks.
This analysis reveals several underlying reasons why disputes were brought against VATIKA LIMITED. Common motivations include contesting penalties for non-compliance or project delays, misunderstandings surrounding land classifications, and disputes in payment obligations. The patterns suggest that many cases stem from a lack of adequate documentation or misunderstanding of contractual obligations on the part of the complainants.
The rationale behind the favorable outcomes for VATIKA LIMITED generally revolves around the insufficiency of evidence provided by opposing parties, the failure of complainants to adhere to legal or procedural requirements, and instances where legal complaints were based on misconceptions about regulations. The builder has shown a capability to defend against exaggerated claims, thereby fostering its reputation as a reliable entity in the real estate market.
In conclusion, while the real estate market is ripe with potential for legitimate disputes, this analysis emphasizes that builders like VATIKA LIMITED often successfully protect themselves against wrongful claims. For potential buyers, it is crucial to approach claims with a critical perspective, ensuring they have reliable information before drawing conclusions about a builder's trustworthiness. Buyers should remain vigilant, informed, and cautious when considering allegations in property transactions.
This table provides details of individual cases contributing to the summary above. Click rows to expand content. Use "Show More/Less" buttons below.
| Case No. | State | Summary | Topic | Detailed Summary | Appellant | Respondent | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F. 3(1)RJ/RERA/Comp…F. 3(1)RJ/RERA/Comp./2019 | RajasthanRajasthan | The Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Rajasthan, …The Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Rajasthan, vacated a notice issued to Vatika Ltd. for not registering their project, Vatika Urban Woods, as it was not an ongoing project. The project had completed more than 60% of sales before the commencement of the RERA Act. | ["RERA", "Project R…["RERA", "Project Registration"] | {"appellant_claim": "The Real Estate Regulatory A…{"appellant_claim": "The Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Rajasthan, issued a notice to Vatika Ltd. for not registering their project, Vatika Urban Woods, as required by the RERA Act.", "respondent_claim": "Vatika Ltd. claimed that their project was not an ongoing project as more than 60% of the units had been sold and possession given before the commencement of the RERA Act.", "final_verdict": "The Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Rajasthan, vacated the notice and dropped the proceedings as the project was not an ongoing project.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Real Estate Regulat…Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Rajasthan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| F.15(27)/2019F.15(27)/2019 | RajasthanRajasthan | The case was dropped as the project 'Jaipur 21' i…The case was dropped as the project 'Jaipur 21' is not an ongoing project as per the Rajasthan Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017. The promoter company was directed to register the project for Emerald tower before making any advertisement or sale. | ["Project registrat…["Project registration", "Real Estate Regulation"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that t…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that the project 'Jaipur 21' was not registered as an ongoing project as per the rules.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project 'Jaipur 21' was not an ongoing project as its Phase 1 was excluded from the definition of an ongoing project.", "final_verdict": "The case was dropped as the project 'Jaipur 21' is not an ongoing project as per the Rajasthan Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017. The promoter company was directed to register the project for Emerald tower before making any advertisement or sale.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Suo MotoSuo Moto | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| F.15(144)/2020 and …F.15(144)/2020 and 7 other matters | RajasthanRajasthan | The Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority di…The Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority dismissed notices against Vatika Ltd. for seven projects, finding they were not promoted by the company. A notice against the company for the Park Avenue Market Place project was also dismissed, as the project was not required to be registered under the Act. | ["Real Estate", "Re…["Real Estate", "Regulation"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The notices against Vatika Ltd. were dismissed, as the company was not found to be the promoter of the seven projects. The notice against the company for the Park Avenue Market Place project was also dismissed, as the project was not required to be registered under the Act.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link | |
| RAJRERA-C-2021-4108RAJRERA-C-2021-4108 | RajasthanRajasthan | Complainant booked a flat in Jaipur 21 project, b…Complainant booked a flat in Jaipur 21 project, but project was not registered with RERA. Complaint dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. | ["RERA jurisdiction…["RERA jurisdiction", "Project registration"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the respondent had not completed the project and had demanded an unreasonable amount of money.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the project was not an ongoing project and was not liable to be registered with RERA.", "final_verdict": "The complaint was dismissed for want of jurisdiction as the project was not an ongoing project and was not liable to be registered with RERA.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | IAN Christopher Mic…IAN Christopher Michael | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| RAJ-RERA-C-N-2022-5…RAJ-RERA-C-N-2022-5381 | RajasthanRajasthan | Complaint filed regarding maintenance charges and…Complaint filed regarding maintenance charges and restoration of services in an unregistered project. Authority lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate due to prior exclusion. | ["Jurisdiction", "U…["Jurisdiction", "Unregistered Project"] | {"appellant_claim": "Relief sought for directions…{"appellant_claim": "Relief sought for directions to restrain demand for maintenance charges and restoration of water and electricity supply.", "respondent_claim": "Project exclusion due to prior Authority decision and Supreme Court ruling.", "final_verdict": "Complaint dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Bharti MawaBharti Mawa | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 359/2018359/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Ms. Shagufta Yasmin filed a complaint…Complainant Ms. Shagufta Yasmin filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Ltd. for refund of deposited amount. The authority dismissed the complaint as the complainant failed to make further payments despite several requests. | ["Refund of deposit…["Refund of deposited amount"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant c…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant claimed that she had deposited an amount of Rs. 2 Lakhs with the respondent and paid a further sum of Rs. 1,94,723/-, but the respondent cancelled her allotted floor and demanded an amount of Rs. 10,82,656/- without justification.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to make further payments despite several requests and that the cancellation of the allotment was as per the terms of the booking.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority dismissed the complaint as the complainant failed to make further payments despite several requests and that the cancellation of the allotment was as per the terms of the booking.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ms. Shagufta YasminMs. Shagufta Yasmin | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 421/2018421/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint dismissed as it falls outside the juris…Complaint dismissed as it falls outside the jurisdiction of the authority. Complainant has liberty to file afresh before the appropriate forum. | ["Jurisdiction", "R…["Jurisdiction", "Real Estate"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant s…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant sought relief from the authority, but it was found that the complaint does not fall within the jurisdiction of the authority.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent did not make any claims in this case.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was dismissed with liberty to file afresh before the appropriate forum.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ms. Asha YadavMs. Asha Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1797/20181797/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn with liberty to file afresh. …Complaint withdrawn with liberty to file afresh. Project not registered with the authority. | ["Unregistered Proj…["Unregistered Project"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Complaint stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Jagmohan SinghJagmohan Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1983/20181983/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint filed by Dhruv Malik against Vatika Lim…Complaint filed by Dhruv Malik against Vatika Limited for booking of 2 units. Complainant advised to file single complaint for each unit. Complaint stands dismissed as withdrawn. | ["Booking of multip…["Booking of multiple units"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that he …{"appellant_claim": "Complainant claimed that he had booked 2 units from the respondent.", "respondent_claim": "Respondent claimed that an individual can file a single complaint for each individual unit.", "final_verdict": "Complaint stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file single/individual complaint for each unit.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Dhruv MalikDhruv Malik | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1829/20181829/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Navneet Khanna filed a complaint against M/s Vati…Navneet Khanna filed a complaint against M/s Vatika Limited for not registering their project with the authority. The case was dismissed as withdrawn due to a settlement between the parties. | ["Unregistered Proj…["Unregistered Project"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that the respondent's project was not registered with the authority.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the matter had been settled amicably and requested to withdraw the complaint.", "final_verdict": "The case was dismissed as withdrawn due to the settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Navneet KhannaNavneet Khanna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1885/20181885/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint dismissed in default of appearance of t…Complaint dismissed in default of appearance of the complainant. Notice to be issued for unregistered project. | ["Unregistered proj…["Unregistered project"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint dismissed in default of appearance of the complainant", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Pardeep KumarPardeep Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1133/20191133/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint against Vatika Limited for delay in han…Complaint against Vatika Limited for delay in handing over possession of a booked unit. Authority advised complainants to approach civil court first. | ["Delay in possessi…["Delay in possession", "Civil court proceedings"] | {"appellant_claim": "Delay in handing over posses…{"appellant_claim": "Delay in handing over possession of a booked unit", "respondent_claim": "Produced orders from civil court showing interim stay and injunction", "final_verdict": "Complaint stood disposed of, advised to approach civil court first", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Hem MerchantHem Merchant | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 488/2019488/2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint dismissed for want of prosecution as co…Complaint dismissed for want of prosecution as complainant failed to appear despite repeated calls. | ["Want of prosecuti…["Want of prosecution"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint dismissed for want of prosecution", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ramveer GoswamiRamveer Goswami | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| E/5071/1986/2018E/5071/1986/2018 | HARYANAHARYANA | Pankaj Kansal vs Vatika Limited. Complainant Pank…Pankaj Kansal vs Vatika Limited. Complainant Pankaj Kansal represented through Shri R.K. Kansal. Respondent Vatika Limited represented through Shri Venket Rao Advocate. Complaint disposed of with payment of due amount in three instalments. | ["Payment of due am…["Payment of due amount"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Pankaj Kansal cla…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Pankaj Kansal claimed payment of due amount from Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Limited claimed that the due amount would be paid in three instalments through RTGS along with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum on 15% of every month.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was disposed of with the payment of due amount in three instalments through RTGS along with interest at the rate of 10.70% per annum on 15% of every month.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Pankaj KansalPankaj Kansal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 37240f202137240f2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint filed by allottees against the promoter…Complaint filed by allottees against the promoter for violation of section 11(4)(f) and section 17(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The authority has disposed of the complaint. | ["Non-compliance of…["Non-compliance of obligations by promoter"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants alleged that the respondent violated section 11(4)(f) and section 17(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainants failed to make timely payments and violated the terms of the agreement.", "final_verdict": "The authority disposed of the complaint and granted liberty to the complainants to file a separate complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Nawal KhannaNawal Khanna | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1358/2022CR/1358/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn as matter is being pursued be…Complaint withdrawn as matter is being pursued before NCDRC. Case disposed off. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint withdrawn and case disposed off.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Narendra Narain RaiNarendra Narain Rai | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| cR/619/2020cR/619/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn by Bhawna Goel against Vatika…Complaint withdrawn by Bhawna Goel against Vatika Limited, case disposed off. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Complaint withdrawn, case disposed off.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Bhawna GoelBhawna Goel | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7876/2022CR/7876/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants Menu Singla and Jeensy Singla withdr…Complainants Menu Singla and Jeensy Singla withdrew their complaint against Vatika Limited. The case is disposed off. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants do not want to pursue the complaint further and wish to withdraw it.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not applicable", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint is withdrawn and disposed off.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Jeensy SinglaJeensy Singla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7875/2022CR/7875/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants Durga Das Singla and Ankit Singla wi…Complainants Durga Das Singla and Ankit Singla withdrew their complaint against Vatika Limited, and the case was disposed off. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants claimed that they did not want to pursue the complaint further and wished to withdraw it.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent, Vatika Limited, did not make any claims as the complainants withdrew the complaint.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was withdrawn, and the case was disposed off.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ankit SinglaAnkit Singla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/405/2022CR/405/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Parveen Mali vs Vatika Ltd. - Complaint withdrawn…Parveen Mali vs Vatika Ltd. - Complaint withdrawn due to an amicable settlement. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, Parveen Mali, filed a complaint against Vatika Ltd. for an unknown reason.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Ltd. denied any wrongdoing and claimed that the complaint was baseless.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was withdrawn due to an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Parveen MaliParveen Mali | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2310/2021CR/2310/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The case was disposed of in terms of a settlement…The case was disposed of in terms of a settlement deed signed by both parties. The complainant did not appear in the matter, and possession of an alternate unit had been handed over to them. | ["Settlement Deed"]["Settlement Deed"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The case was disposed of in terms of the settlement deed signed by both parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Priti MundhraPriti Mundhra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/5135/2021CR/5135/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants sought relief for assured return…The complainants sought relief for assured returns, but the authority found that the relief had already been granted in a previous case, thus disposing of the matter. | ["Assured Returns",…["Assured Returns", "Previous Case"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants claimed that they were entitled to assured returns from the respondents.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondents claimed that the relief sought by the complainants had already been granted in a previous case.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The authority found that the relief had already been granted in a previous case and thus disposed of the matter.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Tanuja KrishanatrayTanuja Krishanatray | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 1444 of 20191444 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed an application for recall o…The complainant filed an application for recall of an order dated 18.02.2021 passed by the Authority. The Authority rejected the application stating that it does not have the power to recall its orders except under section 39 of the Act, 2016. | ["Recall of order",…["Recall of order", "Authority's power"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that the Authority's order dated 18.02.2021 was incorrect and sought recall of the order.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the Authority does not have the power to recall its orders except under section 39 of the Act, 2016.", "final_verdict": "The Authority rejected the application for recall of the order.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mrs. Sangeeta GuptaMrs. Sangeeta Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2935/2021CR/2935/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The case was settled amicably between the complai…The case was settled amicably between the complainant Surinder Kaur Sidana and the respondent Vatika Limited through a settlement deed dated 20.03.2023. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter was disposed off as the parties had settled amicably through a settlement deed dated 20.03.2023.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Surinder Kaur SidanaSurinder Kaur Sidana | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 763 of 2020763 of 2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant sought refund of paid amount and comp…Complainant sought refund of paid amount and compensation for mental agony, but complaint was dismissed as barred by limitation. | ["Refund", "Limitat…["Refund", "Limitation"] | {"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of…{"appellant_claim": "Complainant sought refund of paid amount and compensation for mental agony.", "respondent_claim": "Respondents claimed that complaint was barred by limitation and that complainant was a chronic defaulter.", "final_verdict": "Complaint was dismissed as barred by limitation.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Shipra GuptaShipra Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 4250 of 20214250 of 2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainants sought possession of a unit cancelle…Complainants sought possession of a unit cancelled by the respondent due to non-payment of dues. The Authority held that the cancellation was valid and the complainants were not entitled to possession. | ["Validity of cance…["Validity of cancellation of unit", "Possession of cancelled unit"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that the respondent had cancelled the unit without justification and sought possession of the unit.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the cancellation was valid due to non-payment of dues by the complainants.", "final_verdict": "The Authority held that the cancellation was valid and the complainants were not entitled to possession.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Sunita GuptaSunita Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/622/2022CR/622/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Kamaldeep Kaur, reached an amica…The complainant, Kamaldeep Kaur, reached an amicable settlement with the respondent, Vatika Limited, and a settlement deed was signed by both parties. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was disposed off due to an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Kamaldeep KaurKamaldeep Kaur | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4825/2020CR/4825/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint dismissed in default for non-appearance…Complaint dismissed in default for non-appearance of the complainant. Case consigned to the registry. | ["Default dismissal…["Default dismissal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Complaint dismissed in default for non-appearance of the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vandan ChopraVandan Chopra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/3784/2021CR/3784/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | Ashok Ohliyan vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settlem…Ashok Ohliyan vs Vatika Limited: Amicable settlement reached, allotment letter to be issued. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant, As…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellant, Ashok Ohliyan, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for issues related to his property.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Limited replied to the complaint and stated that the matter had been amicably settled.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The matter was disposed off as the parties had reached an amicable settlement. The respondent agreed to issue the allotment letter for the alternative unit within one week.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ashok OhliyanAshok Ohliyan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2183/2022CR/2183/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Complainant Neelam Malhotra withdrew her complain…Complainant Neelam Malhotra withdrew her complaint against Vatika Limited, citing receipt of final payment and resolution of disputes. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant c…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant claimed that she had disputes with the respondent, but the exact nature of the disputes is not specified in the provided text.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent's claims are not specified in the provided text.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complainant withdrew her complaint, and the matter was disposed of.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Neelam MalhotraNeelam Malhotra | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4730/2022CR/4730/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants filed a complaint against Vatika…The complainants filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for not handing over the possession of commercial units by the due date and seeking assured return. The Authority held that the complaints are not maintainable as each complaint has been filed in respect of multiple units which needs to be adjudicated separately. | ["Maintainability o…["Maintainability of complaints", "Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed tha…{"appellant_claim": "The complainants claimed that Vatika Limited did not hand over the possession of commercial units by the due date and sought assured return.", "respondent_claim": "Vatika Limited claimed that the complaints are not maintainable as each complaint has been filed in respect of multiple units which needs to be adjudicated separately.", "final_verdict": "The Authority held that the complaints are not maintainable as each complaint has been filed in respect of multiple units which needs to be adjudicated separately.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Anr.Anr. | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7533/2022CR/7533/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The parties have settled their dispute amicably a…The parties have settled their dispute amicably and a copy of settlement deed dated 18.08.2023 has been placed on record. | ["Settlement"]["Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The parties have settled their dispute amicably.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Vinod Kumar JetliVinod Kumar Jetli | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4562/2022CR/4562/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | Sancho Josef vs Vatika Limited: Complaint withdra…Sancho Josef vs Vatika Limited: Complaint withdrawn by the complainant. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, Sancho Josef, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Limited replied to the complaint on 26.09.2023.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was dismissed as withdrawn by the complainant.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Sancho JosefSancho Josef | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4729/2021CR/4729/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant alleged that the respondent deman…The complainant alleged that the respondent demanded more than 10% of the total sale consideration without executing the builder buyer agreement. The authority held that the complainant failed to make the payment in terms of section 13 of the Act and the cancellation done by the respondent is valid. | ["Non-payment of 10…["Non-payment of 10% of total sale consideration"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant alleged that the respondent demanded more than 10% of the total sale consideration without executing the builder buyer agreement.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant failed to make the payment in terms of section 13 of the Act and the cancellation done by the respondent is valid.", "final_verdict": "The authority held that the complainant failed to make the payment in terms of section 13 of the Act and the cancellation done by the respondent is valid.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Navneet YadavNavneet Yadav | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2379/2022CR/2379/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant filed an application for rectific…The complainant filed an application for rectification of an order dated 24.05.2023, but the authority rejected it as there was no merit in the application. | ["Rectification of …["Rectification of Order"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought clari…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant sought clarification on whether the construction of the unit was complete despite the absence of OC and CC.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent argued that the paragraph in question was part of their pleading and not an observation of the authority.", "final_verdict": "The authority rejected the application for rectification as there was no merit in it.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Iqram Govind SinghIqram Govind Singh | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/6137/2022CR/6137/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complaint was received on 14.09.2022 and the …The complaint was received on 14.09.2022 and the matter was amicably settled. The complainant requested for withdrawal of complaint. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant f…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant filed a complaint against Vatika Limited for an unknown reason.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent, Vatika Limited, denied the allegations and stated that the matter was amicably settled.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was disposed off as the matter was amicably settled and the complainant requested for withdrawal of complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Lalit Kumar BerryLalit Kumar Berry | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/7058/2022CR/7058/2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Sunil Gujral and Mohita Gujral,…The complainants, Sunil Gujral and Mohita Gujral, withdrew their complaint against Vatika Limited, and the matter was disposed of. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The matter was disposed of as the complainants withdrew their complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mohita GujralMohita Gujral | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/2211/2023CR/2211/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint filed by Vinay Kumar and Shrutikirti Ku…Complaint filed by Vinay Kumar and Shrutikirti Kumar against Vatika Limited. Complaint dismissed as not filed by all complainants and non-joinder of name of all complainants. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainants filed a complaint against Vatika Limited, but the complaint was dismissed as it was not filed by all the complainants and the name of all complainants were not joined with liberty to file afresh.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent claimed that there was a technical defect in the complaint as it was filed by only two allottees but the complaint was in the name of three allottees.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was dismissed as it was not filed by all the complainants and the name of all complainants were not joined with liberty to file afresh.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Shrutikirti KumarShrutikirti Kumar | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/144/2023CR/144/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn with liberty to file fresh co…Complaint withdrawn with liberty to file fresh complaint. Case dismissed as withdrawn. | ["Complaint withdra…["Complaint withdrawal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, …{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant, R Koil Raj, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Vatika Limited replied to the complaint.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The case was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh complaint.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | R Koil RajR Koil Raj | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR No.4925/2023CR No.4925/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Nitin Kumar Gupta, withdrew his …The complainant, Nitin Kumar Gupta, withdrew his complaint against Vatika Limited, and the case was dismissed as withdrawn. | ["Withdrawal of com…["Withdrawal of complaint"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant w…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The complainant wanted to withdraw his complaint.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "None", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The case was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Nitin Kumar GuptaNitin Kumar Gupta | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 256/2018256/2018 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint filed by Gautam Bathla against Vatika L…Complaint filed by Gautam Bathla against Vatika Ltd. and others regarding non-delivery of possession of a plot in Vatika City Central project. The Authority dismissed the complaint for lack of adequate material to issue directions to the developer. | ["Non-delivery of p…["Non-delivery of possession", "Succession dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that his father and the proforma respondent had jointly booked a plot in Vatika City Central project and that the possession of the plot had to be delivered by 06.07.2018. The complainant claimed that he was the rightful successor-owner of the plot and sought directions from the Authority to the developer to deliver the plot to him.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the complainant had not approached them with clean hands and was deliberately misleading the Authority. They claimed that the complainant had no locus standi as he was not the original allottee or a subsequent purchaser. They also claimed that the complainant had not requested or contacted them for endorsement or substitution of his name or claiming rights in his favour.", "final_verdict": "The Authority dismissed the complaint for lack of adequate material to issue directions to the developer. The Authority observed that the complainant had failed to substantiate his claim with reliable documents and that there appeared to be a civil dispute between the complainant and the proforma respondent regarding the succession of the property.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Gautam BathlaGautam Bathla | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 80/202380/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn/settled between parties. Sett…Complaint withdrawn/settled between parties. Settlement deed dated 05.12.2023 filed in registry. | ["Settlement", "Wit…["Settlement", "Withdrawal of Complaint"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "Complaint disposed of as withdrawn/settled. Settlement deed dated 05.12.2023 filed in registry.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Ravi Ji MawaRavi Ji Mawa | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No.168 of 20…Appeal No.168 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | Shagufta Yasmin and another vs. M/s Vatika Ltd. -…Shagufta Yasmin and another vs. M/s Vatika Ltd. - Appeal dismissed as withdrawn. | ["Real Estate Appea…["Real Estate Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | anotheranother | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No.230 of 20…Appeal No.230 of 2019 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant, Rupinder Kalia, withdrew their app…The appellant, Rupinder Kalia, withdrew their appeal against M/s Vatika Ltd. after an amicable settlement was reached on 14.10.2022. | ["Amicable Settleme…["Amicable Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn due to an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Rupinder KaliaRupinder Kalia | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No.388 of 20…Appeal No.388 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appellant challenged the procedure adopted by…The appellant challenged the procedure adopted by the Executing Authority in calculating the amount to be paid to the appellant. The Appellate Tribunal held that the appellant cannot raise his grievance at this stage as he had accepted the amount as directed by the authority. | ["Real Estate", "Ap…["Real Estate", "Appellate Tribunal"] | {"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that h…{"appellant_claim": "The appellant claimed that he was misled by the Executing Authority in calculating the amount to be paid to him.", "respondent_claim": "The respondent claimed that the appellant had accepted the amount as directed by the authority and cannot raise his grievance at this stage.", "final_verdict": "The Appellate Tribunal held that the appellant cannot raise his grievance at this stage as he had accepted the amount as directed by the authority.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Pankaj KansalPankaj Kansal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 392 of 2…Appeal No. 392 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellants, and t…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellants, and the tribunal dismissed it as withdrawn. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mrs. Sangeeta Agarw…Mrs. Sangeeta Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 473 of 2022473 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn upon instru…The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn upon instructions from the appellant. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mrs. Madhushree Kha…Mrs. Madhushree Khaitan | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 688 of 2022688 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and th…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and the tribunal dismissed it as such. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mr. Abhay KhemkaMr. Abhay Khemka | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| Appeal No. 690 of 2…Appeal No. 690 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and th…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, and the tribunal dismissed it as withdrawn. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mr. Harbinder Singh…Mr. Harbinder Singh Dhanjal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 394 of 2022394 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was withdrawn by the appellants, and t…The appeal was withdrawn by the appellants, and the tribunal dismissed the case as withdrawn. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellants cl…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "The appellants claimed that they had instructions to withdraw the present appeal.", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "The respondent had no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal.", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mrs. Sangeeta Agarw…Mrs. Sangeeta Agarwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 687 of 2022687 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the appe…The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the appellant. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mrs. Priti KhemkaMrs. Priti Khemka | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/4659/2020CR/4659/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | The complaint was settled between the parties bef…The complaint was settled between the parties before the court of Adjudicating Officer, and the present complaint stands disposed off. | ["Settled between p…["Settled between parties"] | {"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "r…{"appellant_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "respondent_claim(in detail)": "Not provided", "final_verdict(in detail)": "The complaint was settled between the parties before the court of Adjudicating Officer.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | ANRANR | VATIKA LIMITEDVATIKA LIMITED | Link |
| CR/650/2020CR/650/2020 | HaryanaHaryana | Complaint withdrawn by the appellant due to settl…Complaint withdrawn by the appellant due to settlement between parties. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "Complaint withdrawn due to settlement between parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | GAURAV KUMARGAURAV KUMAR | VATIKA LIMITEDVATIKA LIMITED | Link |
| CR/1700/2021CR/1700/2021 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainant, Pushpendra and another, filed a …The complainant, Pushpendra and another, filed a complaint against Vatika Limited and Primal Capital & Housing Finance Ltd. The matter was settled amicably between the parties, and a settlement deed was signed. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute", "Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that…{"appellant_claim": "The complainant claimed that there was a dispute in the real estate matter.", "respondent_claim": "The respondents claimed that the matter was settled amicably between the parties.", "final_verdict": "The complaint was disposed off in view of the settlement deed.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | AnotherAnother | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| CR/1298/2023CR/1298/2023 | HaryanaHaryana | The complainants, Tani Pathak and Akash Pandey, w…The complainants, Tani Pathak and Akash Pandey, withdrew their case against Vatika Limited and Piramal Capital and Housing Finance Limited after reaching an amicable settlement. | ["Real Estate Dispu…["Real Estate Dispute", "Settlement"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The case was disposed off due to an amicable settlement between the parties.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Akash PandeyAkash Pandey | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
| 395 of 2022395 of 2022 | HaryanaHaryana | The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn upon instru…The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn upon instructions from the appellant. | ["Withdrawal of App…["Withdrawal of Appeal"] | {"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_c…{"appellant_claim": "Not provided", "respondent_claim": "Not provided", "final_verdict": "The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.", "in_favor_of_respondent": "yes"} | Mr. Rajiv KothiwalMr. Rajiv Kothiwal | Vatika LimitedVatika Limited | Link |
Builder Reviews
No reviews for this builder yet. Be the first one to share your thoughts!