E-Paper
Chandigarh realtor gets 3-year jail for failing to refund homebuyer
The case arose from a complaint filed by a homebuyer Rashmi Thakur against Emerging Valley Pvt Ltd over its project at Sector 115, on the Kharar-Landran Road
Prefer HTon Google
For failing to comply with the panel’s order and refund money to a homebuyer, the state consumer disputes redressal commission, Chandigarh, awarded three years’ jail to the managing director (MD) of a city-based real estate firm Emerging Valley.
The MD Gurpreet Singh Sidhu was also told to pay a fine of ₹25,000, failing which, he would undergo an additional 15 days in jail. The commission said the period already spent in custody as an undertrial will be set off against the sentence, subject to verification from jail records.
The case arose from a complaint filed by a homebuyer Rashmi Thakur against Emerging Valley Pvt Ltd over its project at Sector 115, on the Kharar-Landran Road. In its October 29, 2021 order, the commission directed the company and its responsible persons to refund ₹28 lakh to Thakur, along with 12% annual interest from the date of deposit. The commission also awarded Thakur ₹1 lakh as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment and ₹33,000 towards litigation costs. The order was to be complied with within two months, but the directions were not followed. Thakur thus filed an application seeking enforcement of the order.
During the proceedings, Sidhu was summoned under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. He initially pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The commission recorded that he later absconded and was declared a proclaimed offender on March 21, 2024. He was arrested later on April 20, 2025.
On March 12, 2026, Sidhu paid ₹2 lakh to Thakur through a demand draft. The commission noted that the amount due, according to the calculation sheet placed on record, was ₹54 lakh as on February 28, 2022, with future interest. No further payment was made.
Was given several chances to comply: Court
Sidhu submitted that he was facing financial difficulties and unable to make further payment. The commission, however, rejected the plea for leniency, noting that he had been given several opportunities to comply with the order.
The commission observed that Sidhu had “consciously and deliberately failed to honour” its 2021 order. It further said his failure to make payment even after the matter was referred to mediation demonstrated his “intentional and willful non-compliance” with the order.
Holding him guilty under Section 72 of the Consumer Protection Act, the commission said, “The intention to defeat the legal mandate and avoid the liability imposed by the decree is clearly established.”
While deciding the sentence, the commission took note of the prolonged litigation faced by Thakur. It observed that her “plight and suffering” could not be understated as she had been “forced to engage in prolonged litigation for enforcement of a lawful order”.
The commission further described Sidhu’s conduct and said his persistent failure to comply could not be attributed to any “plausible reason or unavoidable circumstance”.
“No cogent explanation or justification has been provided by the accused to explain the inordinate delay and non-compliance,” the commission observed, adding that it appeared to be a case of “willful disobedience and blatant disregard” of the authority of the adjudicating body.
Jailed in 2 other cases
January 15, 2026: The Mohali consumer disputes redressal commission awarded him two years jail for failure to either deliver possession of a flat or refund the homebuyer’s money two years despite the panel’s orders.
April 25, 2026: The state consumer disputes redressal commission, Chandigarh, convicted him under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act for non-compliance of its directions. Despite paying ₹28 lakh during proceedings, an outstanding amount of ₹31 lakh remained unpaid as of March 12, 2026, leading to a 2-year jail sentence along with ₹2,000 fine.
