Chandigarh realty firm told to pay arrears, ₹1.1L penalty to Jammu resident

According to the complaint, the builder had also signed a memorandum of understanding promising committed monthly returns till issuance of completion or occupation certificates

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, has directed Dreamcity Realtors Pvt. Ltd. and its directors to pay pending assured returns and a penalty of ₹1.1 lakh to a buyer after holding them guilty of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice in connection with a real estate project.

The commission directed the builder and its directors to pay pending committed amounts from March 2024 onwards along with 9% annual interest. (HT Photo)

The order was passed on April 16 by a bench comprising justice Raj Shekhar Attri, president of the commission, and member Preetinder Singh. The complaint was filed by Gurmeet Singh, a Jammu resident, who had booked a SOHO unit in the company’s “Sushma Pristine” project in 2021 for ₹52.72 lakh. A developer-buyer agreement executed on August 31, 2022, stated that possession of the unit would be delivered by August 30, 2027.

According to the complaint, the builder had also signed a memorandum of understanding promising committed monthly returns till issuance of completion or occupation certificates. The assured return was fixed at ₹89.95 per sq ft per month, amounting to ₹52,724 monthly for the unit.

The complainant alleged that while the company initially made payments, it stopped them from March 2024 onwards. Several cheques issued by the company were allegedly dishonoured with the remark “payment stopped by drawer”. He further alleged that construction at the project site had remained incomplete, with little progress beyond basement-level parking.

Despite service of notice, the builder company and its directors failed to appear before the commission and proceeded against ex parte. During the proceedings, Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA), which was also named in the complaint, stated that it was neither the promoter nor developer of the project and had no role in the dispute. The commission dismissed the complaint against GMADA, observing that no deficiency in service on its part had been established.

The commission directed the builder and its directors to pay pending committed amounts from March 2024 onwards along with 9% annual interest. It also awarded ₹75,000 as compensation for mental harassment and ₹35,000 towards litigation expenses to the complainant.