Meta Pixel
CNR: --
PENDING

SANGITA RUSTAGI vs ATS REALWORTH PVT.LTD.

Case NumberRERA-GRG-6618-2022
Date of Filing--
Case Type--
Last Hearing16 May 2024
State--
City--
Year of Filing2022

Party Details

Petitioner
  • SANGITA RUSTAGI
Respondent
  • ATS REALWORTH PVT.LTD.

Case Summary

SANGITA RUSTAGI filed Case No. RERA-GRG-6618-2022 in the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) against ATS REALWORTH PVT.LTD.. The case has undergone 8 hearings over 1 year and 2 months. The case is currently pending. 14 orders have been issued in this matter.

Hearing History (8)

  • 16MAY 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement agreement  dated 4.5.2024  to this effect has been placed on record which is duly signed by both the parties. The complainant present in person states that post dated cheques have been given for the period ending 31.5.2024, 30.6.2024 and 31.7.2024  by the respondent and requests that  he may be allowed to file restoration application of the complaint in case these  cheques are not cleared or bounced. Request is allowed.  In view of the above, the matter stands disposed off in terms of settlement agreement.  File be consigned to the registry.

    Stage: DISPOSED

  • 18APR 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The  present complaint was received on 13.10.2022 and the reply on behalf of the respondent was not received despite service of notice. Therefore, in view of the order dated 14.12.2023, the defence of the respondent was struck off. The proxy counsel for the respondent states that  main arguing counsel is not available today to argue the matter. Further states that one week time be granted to issue cheque to the complainant in one go for settlement.  One last and final opportunity is granted to the respondent to put in appearance and argue the matter. Matter to come up on 16.05.2024 for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 7MAR 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The present complaint was received on 13.10.2022 and the reply on behalf of the respondent was not received despite service of notice. Therefore, in view of the order dated 14.12.2023, the defence of the respondent was struck off. The counsel for the respondent states that the settlement talks are at an conclusive stage and matter is likely to be finally settled very shortly and hence requests for a short adjournment. The complainant present in person states that request for adjournment can be considered only if sincere effort on the part of the respondent are made to settle the matter. One more and last opportunity is being given to he respondent to amicably settle the matter failing which the case shall be heard and decided on merit on next date of hearing without any further adjournment. Matter to come up on 18.4.2024 for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 14DEC 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN

    The present complaint has been received on 13.10.2022. Reply on behalf of respondent has not been received within the stipulated time period despite service of notice. On 27.07.2023,  the counsel for the respondent requested for one more opportunity to settle the matter and  if the matter is not  settled then the respondent shall execute the BBA. The respondent was directed to file the reply within two weeks in the registry alongwith cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the complainant and it was specifically recorded that no further adjournment shall be granted.  Despite specific direction, the respondent has failed to file the reply.  The matter is pending for more than one year  and  there is no justification in granting further adjournment.  Therefore, the defense of the respondents is struck off. Matter to come up on 07.03.2024  for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 26OCT 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    Matter is adjourned to 14.12.2023.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 27JUL 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    On the last date of hearing i.e. 04.05.2023, the respondent put in appearance through its counsel and sought short adjournment stating that settlement talks are going on between the parties. Nothing in this regard has been filed by either of the parties. The complainant allottee in the complaint has sought the relief of execution of BBA and directions for completion of the project.  Further the complainant in person during proceedings states that the project is not yet started and hence,  the complainant is seeking refund of the total  amount paid till date and hence 10% of the amount has been collected by the respondent in violation of section 13 of the Act  and hence respondent also to explain as to how the amount beyond 10% has been accepted without execution of BBA. The counsel for the respondent requests for one more opportunity to settle the matter and if not the matter is not settled, then the respondent shall execute the BBA. Matter to come up on 26.10.2023 for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 4MAY 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The complainant states that they does not wish to continue with the project and seeks refund of the deposited amount.  In fact,  the complaint has been filed before the authority for non-execution of BBA.  He further states that the respondent wants to refund the amount after deducting the earnest money but without BBA he cannot deduct any amount. The counsel for the respondent states that the matter be referred to the mediation for settlement but he has not filed any application alongwith fee for the same. The respondent is directed to settle the matter amicably with the complainant, in case the matter is not settled,  the matter may be heard  on merits. The counsel for the respondent requests for a short adjournment as settlement talks are in progress with the complainant allottee and matter is likely to be amicably settled.  Matter to come up on 27.07.2023 for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 2MAR 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA

    The present complaint was filed on 13.10.2022 and registered as complaint no. 6618 of 2022. As per the registry, complainant has sent a copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post and email. The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post and the delivery of same cannot be confirmed as it is shown as “Item dispatched” on 13.12.2022. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at following email addresses: [email protected] & [email protected] The same is shown to have been delivered on 09.12.2022, on the above email addresses as per the report available in the file. The complainant present in person states that inspite of repeated follow up and also having paid an amount of Rs.17,85,000/- out of a sale consideration of Rs.90 Lakhs, the BBA is not yet signed by the respondent-promoter.  The payment was made way back in the year 2019.  As per section 13 (a) no deposit or advance to be taken more than 10% from the allottee without first entering into an agreement for sale. But, the respondent-promoter is not adhering to the same and an opportunity is being given to the respondent to show cause why penal proceedings should not be initiated against the respondent.  The complainant further alleges that there is no development works at site and hence, Planning/Engineering Executive are directed to visit the site and give the detailed report alongwith status of filing of  QPR and if there is any default, the penal proceedings be initiated.  The counsel for the respondent is also directed that the complainant should not be barred to visit site to see the status of the construction. Written reply has not been filed by the respondent.   The counsel for the respondent requests  for a short  adjournment for filing of reply. One last opportunity is being given to the respondent for filing of reply alongwith cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid to the complainant and status of the development works at site and reasons for non execution of BBA and accepting payment  beyond  10% be also clarified in the reply. Matter to come up on 04.05.2023  for further proceedings.

    Stage: FIRST HEARING

Orders (14)

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗

ffiHAI fficuR *- r*, *" IEI1_A rcRl\{ ouse, Civil Lines, G HARYANA REAI ESIATE REGUTAIORY AUTHORITY GURUGRAM rRqrurr A-sq-<t frt{qrqo. srferfi-{"r, $F-qrq 'am, Haryana wtfr"gq.d.

E{rcT6, frRsdr+{, {oqrq, Eftflufi PROCEEDINGS OF THE DAY 6si Day and Dz te Thursday and 16,05 .2024 Complaint t.Io.

CR/6618 /2022 Case titled as Sangita Rustagi VS ATS Real worth Private Limited Complaina rt Sangita Rustagi Representr d through Complainant in person Responder t ATS Real worth Private Limited Responder t Represented Shri Nitish Harsh Gupta Advocate Last datQ o I hearing 18.04.2024 Proceedifrl Recorded by Naresh Kumari and HR Mehta The partfe agreemefr duly sigde ttre comfi given fof respond$r applicatip bouncedf I In view p] agreemen tu!

Proceedi ngs-cum-order ; have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement dated 4.5.2024 to this effect has been placed on record which is by both the parties. rinant present in person states that post dated cheques have beern :he period ending 31,.5,2024, 30.6.2024 ancl 31,.7.2024 by tLre : and requests that he may' be allowed to file restoration of the complaint in case therse cheques are not cleared or equest is allowed. the above, the matter stands disposed off in terms of settlemerrt File be consigned to the registry. ,li,*d,^, Member 1,6.05.2024 iW constituted under section 20 the ReaI Estate (Regulatio,n and l)ev-elopment) Act, 2016 - r{-rir{t rfrf+qq-{ort{frqtrsl sfuftqc, zored um zot. srfimrrtda srtlrst{ul