Ghaziabad Homebuyers Battle Delayed Project

.

The project was initially launched in Noida, but after alleged land disputes, it shifted to Ghaziabad. Fresh agreements were signed in 2013.

But the project, which comprises 506 flats across three towers, remained incomplete.

This month, the buyers found some relief after the Delhi consumer commission ruled in their favour. It ordered Sanchar Nest Sahakari Awas Samiti Ltd, a cooperative society, to refund Rs 79.43 lakh to the two buyers along with an additional Rs 5 lakh in compensation for mental agony and litigation costs.

“This judgment means closure, relief, and justice after years of uncertainty,” said one of the homebuyers.

The other homebuyer described a similar ordeal: “Every passing year brought uncertainty about when or even whether we would finally receive what had been promised.”

“We planned our future around the expectation that the house would be delivered on time. However, due to the prolonged delay, we found ourselves in a situation where our money remained locked in the project while we continued to bear other living expenses and financial obligations,” a homebuyer told The Indian Express.

Even today, key infrastructure work at the project remains unfinished.

According to the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) portal, essential development works, including road work, water supply, and sewer systems, are still listed as “BEING DONE”. The portal also shows that there are currently 23 complaints against this specific project.

The matter reached the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which ruled against the society.

In an order dated June 8, the Commission observed: “The Opposite Party (the housing society) was deficient in rendering services to the complainants (homebuyers) by failing to hand over possession of the flats within a reasonable period and kept the amounts deposited by the complainants for almost 16 years from the date of agreements.”

“The Opposite Party continued extending the date of completion and simultaneously raised additional demands under different heads, thereby increasing the financial burden upon the complainants,” the Commission noted.

It further said it was also evident that while the complainants duly fulfilled their obligations by making payments as demanded and by availing loan facilities, the “Opposite Party failed to fulfil its obligation of delivering possession of the flats within a reasonable period of 42 to 48 months from the date of the agreements despite receipt of the aforesaid substantial amount,” the Commission ruled.

For the homebuyers, the judgment offered some solace in addition to the money refunded to them.

“Purchasing this house was one of the most significant financial decisions of our lives. It required years of savings, careful financial planning, and considerable sacrifices by our family,” one homebuyer shared.

The other said the judgment restored confidence in the legal system and gave reassurance that the rights of ordinary homebuyers are protected by law.

“For years, we lived with anxiety regarding the fate of our investment. We continued to meet our financial obligations while waiting for the developer to fulfil its commitments. There were moments when we felt helpless and uncertain about whether we would ever receive justice,” the buyer added.

Advocate Sarvesh Roy, who represented the homebuyers, said, “The judgment sends a clear message that the dreams and life savings of ordinary citizens cannot be treated casually by developers.”