Meta Pixel
CNR: --
PENDING

DEEPTI NAYAR AND SANDEEP NAYAR vs ALM INFOTECH CITY PVT.LTD.

Case NumberRERA-GRG-157-2023
Date of Filing--
Case TypeRERA-GRG
Last Hearing15 Apr 2025
Court⚖️ Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) ↗
StateHaryana
CityGurgaon
Year of Filing2023

Party Details

Petitioner
  • DEEPTI NAYAR AND SANDEEP NAYAR
Respondent
  • ALM INFOTECH CITY PVT.LTD.

Case Summary

DEEPTI NAYAR AND SANDEEP NAYAR filed Case No. RERA-GRG-157-2023 in the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) against ALM INFOTECH CITY PVT.LTD.. The case has undergone 8 hearings over 1 year and 8 months. The case is currently pending. 9 orders have been issued in this matter.

Hearing History (8)

  • 15APR 2025
    Hearing

    Judge: ARUN KUMAR ASHOK SANGWAN

    Matter is disposed of.

    Stage: DISPOSED

  • 14JAN 2025
    Hearing

    Judge: ARUN KUMAR VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The parties have arrived at an amicable settlement and a copy of settlement agreement dated 22.09.2024  to this effect has been placed on record by the counsel for the respondent which is duly signed by both the parties.   However the counsel for the complainant states that matter is not settled and is pressing the relief sought in the complaint and hence the Authority transferred this case before  full bench for arguments.   Matter to come up on 15.04.2025 before full bench  for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 15OCT 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: ARUN KUMAR VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN

    Due to lack of Coram,  the matter is adjourned to 14.01.2025  for the purpose as already fixed.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 8AUG 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The present complaint has been received on 03.03.2022 and the reply on behalf of respondent has not been received within the stipulated time period despite service of notice. Shri Keshav Maheshwari Advocate has appeared on behalf of the complainant today and filed memo of appearance. No reply has been filed by the respondent till date. The AR of the respondent is directed to file the reply within 15 days with an advance copy to the complainant. Matter to come up on 15.10.2024 before the full bench for further proceedings as similar matters of the projects are listed before the full bench.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 18APR 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    The present complaint has been received on 03.02.2023. Despite proper service of notice, no written reply has yet been filed. Moreover, the service is also confirmed from the fact that the respondent put in appearance through it’s Advocate and marked attendance on 10.08.2023, and 25.01.2024, and was directed to file the reply within stipulated time period. Despite proper service of notice, the respondent has failed to comply with the orders of the authority, by not filing a written reply within the time allowed.  The respondent is directed to file reply within 15 days with an advance copy to the complainant alongwith previous cost. Matter to come up on 08.08.2024 for further proceedings.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 25JAN 2024
    Hearing

    Judge: HARISH GUPTA

    Despite specific order dated 26.10.2023, respondent neither filed reply nor paid cost. As respondent availed more than 10-month time for filing reply and has not filed reply and also not paid cost so further opportunity for filing of reply and payment of cost now justified. Now the matter is listed before the authority on 18.04.2024 for final arguments.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 26OCT 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL

    Matter is adjourned to 25.01.2024.

    Stage: PENDING

  • 10AUG 2023
    Hearing

    Judge: ASHOK SANGWAN

    The present complaint was filed on 03.02.2023 and registered as complaint No. 157 of 2023. No written reply has been filed by the respondent till date. The counsel for the respondent requests for a short adjournment for filing of reply.  The respondent is directed to file reply in the registry of the Authority within two weeks i.e., by 24.08.2023, with cost of Rs. 5000/-  with an advance copy to the complainant. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defence of the respondent shall be  struck of. Matter to come up on  26.10.2023 for further proceedings.

    Stage: FIRST HEARING

Orders (9)

Judgement DetailsView full order PDF ↗

* HARERA S eunuennnr HARYANA REAI.

ESTAIE REGUI.ATORY AUIHORITY GURUGNAM aftqr"n t-{q-{r ftftqrrf, qrfurtur, .Irrqrq New Pwo Rest Hous€.

Clvll Llnes, Gurus.am, Haryana r fr.-q.lfr.

Rcrc T{, Rftc ddc PROCEEDINGS OF THE DAY 42 Day and Date Tuesday and 15.04.2025 Complaint No.

CR/157 /20?3 Case titled as Deepti Nayer and Sandeep Nayer VS ALM Infotech City Private Limited Complainant Deepti Nayer and Sandeep Nayer Represented through Shri Shivang Agarwal proxy counsel Respondent ALM tnfotech City Private Limited Respondent Represented None Last date ofhearing 74.01..2025 Proceeding Recorded by Naresh Kumari and HR Mehta Proceedings-cum-order The parties have arrived at amicable settlement and a copy of settlement agreement dated 22.09.2024 to this effect has been placed on record which is duly signed by both the Parties.

In view of the above, the matter stands disposed of in agreement.

File be consigned to the registry.

IL-- nrr,/t s 5/rn uem$ terms of settlement 4*ur Arun Kumar Chairman t5.04,2025 ffi E.tat. lR.sulat'on od Developmenr, tu I 20 lb ' l-tiF &REi & REr ttAE, 2ot6a fr ,ot r*E ik EnE

Similar Cases

⚖️
SMT RAJ BALA KADIAN vs AMD ESTATES PVT. LTD.
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)RERA-PKL2023PENDING
⚖️
BPTP LIMITED vs PRIYADARSHI KUMAR
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)H-REAT2019PENDING
⚖️
RAJIV KUMAR CHAUHAN vs MS BPTP LIMITED
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)RERA-PKL2021PENDING
⚖️
BPTP LIMITED vs AKSHITA SHARMA
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)H-REAT2019PENDING
⚖️
SANJAY KUMAR vs GEO CONNECT LIMITED
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA)RERA-PKL2023PENDING