SC Asks Centre To Examine Ways To Protect Home-buyers
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Central government to come up with a solution to protect the interests of home-buyers.
 
A bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari made the recommendation while hearing a plea filed by Chitra Sharma, an aggrieved home-buyer of Jaypee Infratech Ltd (JIL).
 
Ms Sharma sought a direction to the government not to allow the liquidation of the company as it would be against the interests of thousands of home-buyers.
 
The bench observed that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was inadequate to protect home-buyers' interests.
 
It observed that the Court had in similar matters asked the government to step in and come up with a proposal.
 
The Court has listed the matter for further hearing on 11th July.
 
Earlier, in a separate matter, the Supreme Court asked the government to examine a proposal to resume construction on stalled housing projects of real estate major Unitech Ltd within 10 days to protect the interests of home-buyers.
 
In the Jaypee Infratech (JIL) matter, Chitra Sharma's advocate Ashwarya Sinha also urged the top court to order a complete forensic audit of JIL since its incorporation to ascertain how the company has spent funds meant for the housing projects.
 
The petition has been moved at a time when the JIL is facing insolvency proceedings because of the huge debts owed to banks.
 
The petitioner apprehended that if JIL goes into liquidation, thousands of home-buyers would be left in the lurch without any remedy.
 
The application cited the apex court judgement passed in August 2018 stating that liquidation of JIL will not help home-buyers, more than 20,000 of whom have invested their life savings.
 
The application alleged that the real estate company had diverted the funds to other projects on a larger scale than Amrapali Group of Companies, which is also involved in a legal battle with home-buyers.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    P M Ravindran

    5 months ago

    When it suits them the apex court would palm off law making to the government. In the instant case the plea was only to direct the government to prevent it from liquidating JIL. Instead of deciding it on merits what was the need to expand the scope? In a case of some flat complexes in Kochi which had been constructed by flouting coastal zone regulations the apex court has directed these flats to be demolished without holding the developers and the public servants who sanctioned the constructions responsible leading about 500 innocent flat owners of their roofs over their head and their live's earning invested in it.

    SC issues notice to Hiranandani in provident fund case
    The Supreme Court has issued notice to the country's leading real estate developer Niranjan Lakhumal Hiranandani and 25 others in a case of criminal conspiracy to allegedly cheat the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) by not depositing provident fund dues of the company's employees amounting to Rs 9 crore.
     
    The order came on an appeal filed by the CBI challenging an April 2018 Bombay High Court order that quashed the case against Hiranandani and other accused. 
     
    The CBI claims Hiranandani colluded with top-level regional EPFO officials to submit a forged list of employees and their documents with the retirement fund body. 
     
    The agency's Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) had in 2008 filed an FIR against Hiranandani for not depositing provident funds of the employees of his group to the tune of Rs 9 crore. 
     
    In its charge sheet filed in 2010, the ACB accused the realtor of cheating, forgery and criminal conspiracy. 
     
    The charge sheet alleged that 137 employees of the Hiranandani group were not enrolled under the EPF Act, and "revealed a large scale evasion of provident fund dues, causing wrongful loss to the Department and wrongful gain to directors of the company". 
     
    The High Court in its 2018 order termed the action by the CBI as "impermissible" and annulled the charge sheet against the 26 accused, including Hiranandani. 
     
    In its petition filed before the Supreme Court, the CBI said: "A false list of the employees was prepared and false documents were used to cheat the EPFO." 
     
    According to the CBI petition: "Investigation revealed that arrears of Rs 2.2 lakh of the Provident Fund for the period between October 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006, were deposited for 48 employees. Surprisingly, these employees were appointed on April 1, 2006."
     
    The petition claimed that the company asked its contractors to prepare false wage records with the intention to mislead the investigation and cheat the EPFO and "deprived the workers of their legitimate pecuniary benefits and social security of insurance and pension and these false records were seized during the search."
     
    The High Court while quashing the CBI charge sheet said no inquiry was conducted under Section 7A of the EPF Act. 
     
    The CBI contended that the Section 7A was applicable when the provident fund was not paid and dispute arose in connection with the amount. "It may not be applicable to a case of conspiracy where documents were fabricated and wage records tampered with," it said.
     
    Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    MahaRERA asks Skyline Construction of RNA Group to Refund Rs85 Lakh with Interest to Kiku Sharda for Delay in Possession of a Flat
    Raghuvendra Sharda, a.k.a Kiku Sharda, a popular comedian from The Kapil Sharma Show, recently played a part in a very favourable judgment under the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA), not only for him, but also for countless homebuyers. 
     
    Mr Sharda had booked flat No. 2102 in Skyline Construction Company’s “RNA Exotica”, located in Oshiwara. He was promised possession of this flat by the end of December 2013, which was then extended to December 2017. However, even after December 2017, Mr Sharda was not given possession of the flat for which he paid nearly Rs85 lakh. 
     
    Despite repeated queries, the builders were not ready to enter into a registered agreement. To top it off, the builders even alleged that the jurisdiction of section 18 of the RERA Act did not apply, because there was no agreed date for possession, and that they had revised the date to the end of December 2019!
     
    BD Kapadnis, member and adjudicating officer of MahaRERA, ruled that the builder was wrong, and referred to a judgment of the High Court in saying, “The delay in handing over the possession would be counted from the date mentioned in the agreement for sale entered into by the promoter and the allottee. Hence, the revised date which is unilaterally decided, is unilateral act of the respondents and it would not bind the complainant.”
     
    Mr Kapadnis also ensured justice, by expanding the definition of “false statement” under Section 12 of the RERA Act, to include any verbal falsities, in addition to notices, advertisements, brochures, model apartments or any plots of a building, as it is now considered as a form of advertisement. 
     
    Another important point that the order raised, was the definition of agreement being interpreted to include oral agreements. However, in Mr Sharda’s case, there was consideration of Rs78 lakh, and letters that acknowledged that this money was for booking the flat, in their project. 
     
    Mr Kapadnis held that Mr Sharda was to be paid a grand total of Rs84.95 lakh including interest of 10.75% per annum, from the date of the first payment, and Rs20,000 for the cost of the complaint.
     
    This judgment by MahaRERA would help several homebuyers who do not have a written agreement, and have been facing several delays in their projects, because the builder is able to delay the project by several years using tactics like the ones seen above, and countless other methods.
     
    Last year too, the MahaRERA had directed Skyline Construction to refund Rs1.58 crore along with an interest of 10.55% to one Manish Mody for delay in possession. (Read: MahaRERA asks Skyline Construction of RNA Group to Refund Rs1.58 crore with Interest to Flat-buyer Even Though There was No Sale Deed)
     
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Mayank Kumar

    5 months ago

    Question is if Builder refunds money. Even after RERA passing orders in favor of home buyer, people arent getting money back. Builders are first defying the order after which we need raise a order execution request, which again followed by an RC certificate and then also builder has an option to move to High Court.

    We are listening!

    Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
      Loading...
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email

    BUY NOW

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)
    FREE: Your Complete Family Record Book
    Keep all the Personal and Financial Details of You & Your Family. In One Place So That`s Its Easy for Anyone to Find Anytime
    We promise not to share your email id with anyone