The Supreme Court on Friday granted conditional interim bail to Sanjay Chandra and Ajay Chandra, two promoters of real estate firm Unitech Ltd, in a fraud case lodged by home buyers of its Gurugram-based housing project.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud considered the statement made on behalf of the real estate barons that they have already deposited Rs 15 crore with the apex court registry in pursuance of the order passed on August 24.
The court then asked the Chandras to deposit Rs 5 crore more with the registry by September 8 for grant of conditional interim bail for four weeks.
The bench also asked the real estate company to deliver the possession of flats, which are ready, to over hundred buyers by September 6.
Earlier after hearing parties, the bench had said, "we think it appropriate to direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs 15 crore before the Registry of this Court within two weeks hence.
"The said amount shall be invested in an interest bearing short term deposit in the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi."
The bench had said that if the Chandras were able to deposit the amount earlier, then they can mention their bail pleas for urgent hearing.
"If any consumer is desirous of getting a flat, the authorised agent of the petitioner can hand over the flat in accordance with law," it had said.
The apex court had asked the both the officials of the firm to file a list of buyers who have been refunded the money or alternatively, how many of them have been allotted alternate flats.
Sanjay Chandra and his brother Ajay Chandra had moved the apex court against the August 11 order of the Delhi High Court that had refused to grant interim bail to them and asked them to file a status report.
Five buyers of the Unitech's Anthea Floors Wildflower Country project led by some Delhi residents had filed a complaint for registration of FIR against the company in 2015.
Later, 90 more complaints were received against the firm for the same project which were clubbed with the FIR.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and justices A M Khanwilkar and D Y Chandrachud considered the statement made on behalf of the real estate barons that they have already deposited Rs 15 crore with the apex court registry in pursuance of the order passed on August 24.
The court then asked the Chandras to deposit Rs 5 crore more with the registry by September 8 for grant of conditional interim bail for four weeks.
Also Read
The bench, meanwhile, directed lawyers Manjeet Singh Ahaluwalia, who represent some home buyers and Abhimanyu Bhandari, the counsel for the Chandras, to assist the apex court registry in disbursing the deposited money on "pro-rata" basis to home buyers who wanted their money back.
The bench also asked the real estate company to deliver the possession of flats, which are ready, to over hundred buyers by September 6.
Earlier after hearing parties, the bench had said, "we think it appropriate to direct the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs 15 crore before the Registry of this Court within two weeks hence.
"The said amount shall be invested in an interest bearing short term deposit in the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi."
The bench had said that if the Chandras were able to deposit the amount earlier, then they can mention their bail pleas for urgent hearing.
"If any consumer is desirous of getting a flat, the authorised agent of the petitioner can hand over the flat in accordance with law," it had said.
The apex court had asked the both the officials of the firm to file a list of buyers who have been refunded the money or alternatively, how many of them have been allotted alternate flats.
Sanjay Chandra and his brother Ajay Chandra had moved the apex court against the August 11 order of the Delhi High Court that had refused to grant interim bail to them and asked them to file a status report.
Five buyers of the Unitech's Anthea Floors Wildflower Country project led by some Delhi residents had filed a complaint for registration of FIR against the company in 2015.
Later, 90 more complaints were received against the firm for the same project which were clubbed with the FIR.