The Supreme Court on Monday directed the directors of the Unitech real estate company to be present personally on May 5 and reply to the matter on not handing over money to more than 100 buyers who are yet to be allotted flats.
A bench of the apex Court headed by Justice Dipak Misra today said the stay of the Delhi High court order would continue till further hearing of the case.
More than 100 buyers of flats had knocked the doors of the apex court seeking return of their money, in which they said that they did not get their flats in time as a result of which they approached the apex court for a direction and order against the real estate company.
On October 19, 2016 the Supreme Court ordered to disburse Rs. 15 crore deposited by the Unitech builders in the court's registry to the investors on a pro rata basis after the builder failed to complete its projects on time.
The apex court directed to refund the money to 38 buyers as buyers refuse to rely on the assurance of possession by 2017 and has directed Unitech to deposit Rs. two crore more in registry in the next four weeks.
The investors will have to deposit their relevant documents to obtain the money.
The top court had also told the Unitech developers to live up to the terms of its contract in the vistas project in Gurgaon.
In August, the Supreme Court pulled up Unitech, which had been asked to deposit Rs. five crore by August 5, 2016, for delaying the completion of a high-end residential project Burgundy that the real estate firm had launched on the Noida-Greater Noida Expressway, saying it will be liable to contempt of court if it violates the settlement terms.
The apex court said that the chairman and the managing director of the company will be liable for contempt of court.
"Buyers can directly move the Supreme Court for any violation of settlement terms so that Companies like Unitech learn a lesson," the apex court observed.
The real estate firm told the top court that it is giving two plots each to three flat allottees in Burgundy towers (Noida) who had not been given possession.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
