Home Unitech Limited Unitech Builders (75 Complaints)
Cheated Buyers 16th Dec

Unitech wants Telangana govt to return Rs 500 crore ?
State sold land without title

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/regulatory/unitech-wants-telangana-govt-to-return-rs-500-crore/62081012?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Cheated Buyers 15th Dec

Promoters hold 17.92 % stake in Unitech, of which 73 % is pledged, as per the shareholding pattern at the end of the second quarter of this fiscal.

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/hdfc-sells-invokes-pledged-shares-of-unitech/62077261

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Cheated Buyers 13th Dec

Unitech case: SC raps Centre on moving NCLT ask Centre why it did not take permission to move the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) to take over management of Unitech when the apex court was already dealing with the case‬

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/regulatory/unitech-case-sc-raps-centre-on-moving-nclt-without-permission/62035088?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Cheated Buyers 12th Dec

SC, “We are more concerned with home buyers (rather than) with the company and fixed deposit holders/investors. Home buyers are not investors.”‬

Source : http://www.financialexpress.com/industry/unitech-targets-nclt-says-tribunal-went-against-supreme-court-order/970060/?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Cheated Buyers 12th Dec

‬Around 19,000 homes are delayed by Unitech and owes Rs 723 crore to 51,000 fd holders. Sanjay and Ajay Chandra, the managing directors of the company, are currently in prison in criminal cases‬

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/regulatory/unitech-moves-sc-against-govts-takeover-plea/62018746?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

The rise and stunning fall of Unitech

Cheated Buyers 9th Dec

2G was probably biggest disruption for Unitech. From one of biggest wealth creator to wealth destroyer

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/industry/the-rise-and-stunning-fall-of-unitech/61992586?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Cheated Buyers 9th Dec

NCLT suspends Unitech board, bars directors from selling assets; order subject to SC directives

Source : https://realty.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/regulatory/nclt-suspends-unitech-board-on-govts-plea-says-order-subject-to-sc-rulings/61981565?

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 30th Nov

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has again on Thursday denied interim bail to Unitech managing director Sanjay Chandra, asking home buyers to register their claim for refunds or flats within three weeks.

A total of around 16,300 home buyers, with a total money paid of Rs 7,800 crore, in several projects of Unitech have been facing delays at present, advocate Pawanshree Aggrawal, the amicus curiae appointed for the case, informed the apex court today.

Denying the bail to the Unitech MD, the Supreme Court said that it has to see the interest of 16,300 home buyers against one person here, according to Aggrawal.

The apex court also asked the amicus curiae to collect the details of home buyers seeking refunds or possession of flats within three weeks. The next date of hearing has been scheduled for October 23.

The Supreme Court early this month had appointed advocate Pawanshree Aggrawal as the amicus curiae to provide details of all the liabilities of Unitech so far. He has be been entrusted to form the website as well.

\"The website will be active from tomorrow,\" he said.

The Supreme Court has already refused to grant interim bail to Unitech promoter Sanjay Chandra twice this month itself.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 30th Nov

The bench headed by Presiding Member Ajit Bharihoke also awarded Rs 10,000 as litigation cost to Mathur and said that the firm had failed to hand over the possession even after eight years of promised delivery date.

The apex consumer commission has asked real estate firm Unitech Ltd to refund over Rs 41 lakh to a buyer, who had booked a property in one of its projects, saying the realtor had indulged in unfair trade practice. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has asked the company to refund Rs 41,15,320, to Haryana resident D K Mathur, saying “the allottee cannot be expected to wait for possession of the apartment for an indefinite period”. It also noted that the firm was not in a position to hand over the possession of the apartment. The bench headed by Presiding Member Ajit Bharihoke also awarded Rs 10,000 as litigation cost to Mathur and said that the firm had failed to hand over the possession even after eight years of promised delivery date.
“The opposite party (firm) is not in a position to offer possession of the apartment. The company shall refund the amount with simple interest at 10 per cent per annum without any further liability. “Thus, in our view, this is a case of the opposite party not being in a position to offer possession of the apartment as the allottee cannot be expected to wait for possession of the apartment for indefinite period,” the commission observed. It also said that despite receiving almost 95 per cent of the amount, the firm failed to deliver the possession of the apartment. “In absence of any explanation for failure to comply with the stipulation of delivery of possession, we have no hesitation in concluding that the opposite party has committed deficiency in service as also has indulged in unfair trade practice,” the commission said. According to the complaint, in 2006, Mathur had paid over Rs 41 lakh and booked an apartment in Unitech Horizon, a residential project of the firm in Alistonia Estate at Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh.
Mathur was promised delivery of possession of the apartment by the end of 2008, but he failed to get it. The company had said it was not in a position to hand over the property as the delay in completing the construction and delivery of possession, were beyond its control

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 29th Nov

At stake is Rs7,800 crore that Unitech owes to 16,300 home buyers across 61 projects and Rs6,733 crore of debt

Bengaluru/New Delhi: Realty firm Unitech Ltd needs to make arrangements for repayments to its customers and continue construction of its many delayed projects even as both managing directors Sanjay Chandra and his brother Ajay Chandra remain in custody.

The Gurugram-based company, once the second largest developer, next only to DLF Ltd, needs to raise money not just to repay loans of banks and lenders, but also customers, who have booked homes in projects that are still at the land stage.

At stake is Rs7,800 crore that Unitech owes to 16,300 home buyers across 61 projects. Unitech also has around Rs6,733 crore of debt.

In its latest annual report, Unitech says it has earmarked “six unencumbered land parcels to be sold and the entire sale proceeds thereof shall be utilized for repayment of the said deposits”.

“The company is making best possible efforts for sale of the land parcels earmarked for repayment of the deposits, but such sale process is taking time due to global economic recession and liquidity crisis, particularly in the real estate sector of India,” Unitech said.

The Chandra brothers, along with others, are embroiled in a case of alleged forgery lodged by home buyers of a Gurugram-based housing project. The apex court has asked amicus curiae (friend of the court) Pawan Sree Agrawal to maintain accounts of Unitech’s different projects, home buyers and the extent of refund granted to each of them through a designated website. Unitech has been asked to collate details of the refunds to home buyers. The matter will be heard next on 23 October.

A Unitech spokesperson said chairman Ramesh Chandra is overseeing the company currently. The company didn’t respond to a questionnaire sent by Mint.

India’s real estate sector is undergoing a churn on top of a prolonged slowdown along with protests by homebuyers, following diversion of funds by developers and project delays. Insolvency proceedings have been initiated against promoters of many realty firms including Amrapali Group, after angry customers dragged developers to court for non-delivery of homes.

In Unitech’s Vistas project in Gurugram, more than 1,100 buyers have opted either for a refund or possession, after a long wait.

“All this while, Unitech was only saying that construction will happen. We believe the Supreme Court will take care of the matter now,” said Savita Sinha, a home buyer and advocate with the Vistas Residents Association.

Unitech posted a loss of Rs38.39 crore for the quarter-ended June due to lower sales compared to a loss of Rs44.82 crore in the year-ago period.

The annual report said there are delays in the payment of income tax, service tax and provident fund dues. While the focus is on delivery, it continuously grappled with cash-flow and liquidity issues, Unitech said.

“...Cash-flows have been adversely impacted and there were certain delays/defaults in timely repayment of dues (including interest) to banks and financial institutions in respect of term loans and non-convertible debentures. It is submitted that the company endeavors to streamline its future operations and discharge the said liabilities in time,” it said.
Its dispute with Life Insurance Corp. of India (LIC), for instance, is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The dispute is over non-repayment of dues owed to LIC.

In the last hearing, the apex court indicated that it may consider auctioning the properties through a court appointed receiver in the future. Unitech has been trying to sell its land parcels and has raised some money but that isn’t enough.

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. (JMFARC) has provided additional funding of Rs200 crore to revive a few distressed projects of Unitech. The transaction came as part of a resolution post acquisition of Unitech’s loan of around Rs860 crore from housing financing company Housing Development Finance Corp. Ltd (HDFC) last November. In a BSE filing in November 2016, HDFC had said Unitech had not been able to service its loan due to slow sales, thereby adversely impacting construction work.

Anil Bhatia, managing director and CEO of JMFARC, said the company had agreed to provide funding to Unitech as the projects are well diversified, spread over multiple locations and in various stages of construction.

“In the past, we have infused funds into two real estate projects, leading to a quicker turnaround. This experience prompts us to fund distressed assets which can realise maximum value,” Bhatia said.

It’s not going to be easy or enough for Unitech, said analysts.

“There will be some hope if the promoters are out on bail. Otherwise it is tough for Unitech to sell land and arrange the money given the conditions,” said a senior property consultant, who didn’t wish to be named.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 29th Nov

Builder fails to deliver possession on time

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), on October 24, directed Unitech Reliable Projects Private Limited to compensate a flat buyer by paying a sum of Rs. 50 lakh, after it failed to deliver the possession of the flat within the stipulated time.

The complainant Manish Sharma, had alleged that he had booked a flat, in a housing project which was being developed by Unitech in Greater Noida.

It was alleged that despite the complainant having paid more than Rs. 50 lakh, the real estate developers had failed to deliver the possession of the flat even after the lapse of close to four years.

“The complainants have filed the instant complaint seeking possession of the subject flat with an 18% interest on the payment made for the delayed period or in alternative, the refund of the amount paid to the opposite party with an 18% interest thereon” read the order.

Claim contested

However, the developers contested the claim stating that there had been no deficiency in services, as the project was incomplete because of unforeseen circumstances like disruption caused due to agitation by farmers whose lands had been acquired, acute shortage of labour and an order from the National Green Tribunal which restrained builders in Noida and Greater Noida from utilising groundwater.

Plea rejected

However, the forum rejected the plea stating that the developers had failed to provide ‘cogent evidence to prove the said circumstances’.

Holding the developers guilty of deficiency in services, the NCDRC said, “It is evident from the allotment letter of 2010 that the opposite party was required to deliver the possession of the subject flat within 36 months, which would be by the end of November 2013. Undisputedly, the opposite party has failed to fulfil its promise till although the complainant had paid almost 90% of the consideration amount.”

“The opposite party cannot take advantage of its own wrong and utilise the money received by them by unfair trade practice for inordinate period” added the commission.

Directing the developers to refund the entire amount at an interest of 10%, an additional compensation of Rs. 10,000 has been awarded to the complainant as litigation costs.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 29th Nov

The apex court said it will consider grant of bail to Chandra only after the money is deposited

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday again refused to grant bail to Unitech managing director Sanjay Chandra, directing the real estate firm to deposit Rs 750 crore in its registry by December end for giving refunds to the aggrieved home buyers.

The apex court said it will consider grant of bail to Chandra only after the money is deposited.

However, the court restricted all other forums from taking any coercive steps against Unitech on the basis of complaints filed by home buyers, informed advocate Ashwarya Sinha, who represented over 100 home buyers from several projects of Unitech in the court.

The apex court also allowed lawyers and Unitech officials to meet Chandra in Tihar jail daily for arranging the money. It also permitted video conferencing facility to Chandra to be able to sell his properties and assets to generate Rs 750 crore. The next date of hearing in the case has been kept in the second week of January.

Meanwhile, Pawanshree Agrawal, the amicus curiae appointed for the case, today informed the apex court that around 4,200 home buyers want flats, 5,000 home buyers want refund, while 6,000 people have not registered their claims on the portal so far. Agrawal estimated that over Rs 2,000 crore is required for giving refund to home buyers.

Unitech on Monday submitted a sealed cover to the court containing pictures of the stages of all buildings, and pictures of all projects to be monetised for providing refund and possession.

The builder asked for six months to deliver and estimated Rs 750 crore for completion of more than 3,500 flats, according to Sinha.

The Supreme Court in September had ordered formation of a web portal for home buyers to register their claims for possession of flats or refunds.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud today ordered Agrawal to create another portal where people who have invested in the fixed doposit schemes of Unitech can register their claims.

Early last month, the Supreme Court had assured home buyers that it will ensure relief according to their choice — getting the money back or allotment of a flat.

Unitech has already deposited a total of Rs 20 crore, as directed by the court in earlier orders.

Unitech promoters Sanjay Chandra and Ajay Chandra are seeking interim bail from the apex court after the Delhi High Court on August 11 rejected their petition in a criminal case lodged by home buyers of Unitech\'s two Gurgaon projects.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 28th Nov

Bengaluru/New Delhi: Realty firm Unitech Ltd needs to make arrangements for repayments to its customers and continue construction of its many delayed projects even as both managing directors Sanjay Chandra and his brother Ajay Chandra remain in custody.

The Gurugram-based company, once the second largest developer, next only to DLF Ltd, needs to raise money not just to repay loans of banks and lenders, but also customers, who have booked homes in projects that are still at the land stage.

At stake is Rs7,800 crore that Unitech owes to 16,300 home buyers across 61 projects. Unitech also has around Rs6,733 crore of debt.

In its latest annual report, Unitech says it has earmarked “six unencumbered land parcels to be sold and the entire sale proceeds thereof shall be utilized for repayment of the said deposits”.

“The company is making best possible efforts for sale of the land parcels earmarked for repayment of the deposits, but such sale process is taking time due to global economic recession and liquidity crisis, particularly in the real estate sector of India,” Unitech said.

The Chandra brothers, along with others, are embroiled in a case of alleged forgery lodged by home buyers of a Gurugram-based housing project. The apex court has asked amicus curiae (friend of the court) Pawan Sree Agrawal to maintain accounts of Unitech’s different projects, home buyers and the extent of refund granted to each of them through a designated website. Unitech has been asked to collate details of the refunds to home buyers. The matter will be heard next on 23 October.

A Unitech spokesperson said chairman Ramesh Chandra is overseeing the company currently. The company didn’t respond to a questionnaire sent by Mint.

India’s real estate sector is undergoing a churn on top of a prolonged slowdown along with protests by homebuyers, following diversion of funds by developers and project delays. Insolvency proceedings have been initiated against promoters of many realty firms including Amrapali Group, after angry customers dragged developers to court for non-delivery of homes.

In Unitech’s Vistas project in Gurugram, more than 1,100 buyers have opted either for a refund or possession, after a long wait.

“All this while, Unitech was only saying that construction will happen. We believe the Supreme Court will take care of the matter now,” said Savita Sinha, a home buyer and advocate with the Vistas Residents Association.

Unitech posted a loss of Rs38.39 crore for the quarter-ended June due to lower sales compared to a loss of Rs44.82 crore in the year-ago period.

The annual report said there are delays in the payment of income tax, service tax and provident fund dues. While the focus is on delivery, it continuously grappled with cash-flow and liquidity issues, Unitech said.

“...Cash-flows have been adversely impacted and there were certain delays/defaults in timely repayment of dues (including interest) to banks and financial institutions in respect of term loans and non-convertible debentures. It is submitted that the company endeavors to streamline its future operations and discharge the said liabilities in time,” it said.
Its dispute with Life Insurance Corp. of India (LIC), for instance, is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. The dispute is over non-repayment of dues owed to LIC.

In the last hearing, the apex court indicated that it may consider auctioning the properties through a court appointed receiver in the future. Unitech has been trying to sell its land parcels and has raised some money but that isn’t enough.

JM Financial Asset Reconstruction Co. (JMFARC) has provided additional funding of Rs200 crore to revive a few distressed projects of Unitech. The transaction came as part of a resolution post acquisition of Unitech’s loan of around Rs860 crore from housing financing company Housing Development Finance Corp. Ltd (HDFC) last November. In a BSE filing in November 2016, HDFC had said Unitech had not been able to service its loan due to slow sales, thereby adversely impacting construction work.

Anil Bhatia, managing director and CEO of JMFARC, said the company had agreed to provide funding to Unitech as the projects are well diversified, spread over multiple locations and in various stages of construction.

“In the past, we have infused funds into two real estate projects, leading to a quicker turnaround. This experience prompts us to fund distressed assets which can realise maximum value,” Bhatia said.

It’s not going to be easy or enough for Unitech, said analysts.

“There will be some hope if the promoters are out on bail. Otherwise it is tough for Unitech to sell land and arrange the money given the conditions,” said a senior property consultant, who didn’t wish to be named.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 28th Nov

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain the bail plea of of Unitech’s managing director Sanjay Chandra, asking the builder to deposit Rs 1,000 crore first as a bonafide.

Unitech, represented by former solicitor general Ranjit Kumar, requested release of Chandra for four weeks to arrange the required fund needed to refund home buyers and construction of flats.

However, rejecting the bail plea, the Supreme Court observed that Unitech should first deposit a substantial amount of around Rs 1,000 crore, only then it would consider the bail plea for Chandra, according to advocate Ashwarya Sinha, who represented over 100 home buyers from several projects of Unitech in the court.

Meanwhile, Pawanshree Agrawal, the amicus curiae appointed for the case, today informed the Supreme Court that around 4,688 home buyers so far have registered their refund claims, totaling to around Rs 1,865 crore. In a report submitted in the apex court today, Agrawal also informed around 4,350 home buyers have so far sought possession of their flats from Unitech.

The Supreme Court in September had ordered formation of a web portal for home buyers to register their claims for possession of flats or refunds.

A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud today ordered that the portal will continue to be open for other home buyers to register their claims. The next date of hearing in the case has been kept on October 30.

Early last month, the Supreme Court had assured home buyers that it will ensure relief according to their choice — getting the money back or allotment of a flat.

Unitech has already deposited a total of Rs 20 crore, as directed by the court in earlier orders.

Unitech promoters Sanjay Chandra and Ajay Chandra are seeking interim bail from the apex court after the Delhi High Court on August 11 rejected their petition in a criminal case lodged by home buyers of Unitech\'s two Gurgaon projects.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name

Mayursinh Kumpavat 28th Nov

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), on October 24, directed Unitech Reliable Projects Private Limited to compensate a flat buyer by paying a sum of Rs. 50 lakh, after it failed to deliver the possession of the flat within the stipulated time.

The complainant Manish Sharma, had alleged that he had booked a flat, in a housing project which was being developed by Unitech in Greater Noida.

It was alleged that despite the complainant having paid more than Rs. 50 lakh, the real estate developers had failed to deliver the possession of the flat even after the lapse of close to four years.

“The complainants have filed the instant complaint seeking possession of the subject flat with an 18% interest on the payment made for the delayed period or in alternative, the refund of the amount paid to the opposite party with an 18% interest thereon” read the order.

0 Comments

Click here to hide display name