List the Developer who Delay projects in over all Mumbai, Thane and Navi Mumbai. Post Here

Project:
Date of project launch:
Start of project:
Date of possession:
First Dead line miss:
Second Dead line miss:
Reason for Delay:
Phase-1 Delay:
Phase-2 Delay:
Phase-3 Delay:
Read more
Reply
24 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Project: DB Ozon Complex, located near Dahisar Check Naka,
    Date of project launch:2006
    Start of project: March 2008
    Date of possession: December 2012.
    First Dead line miss:
    Second Dead line miss:
    Reason for Delay:

    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:

    Where are our flats, ask DB buyers

    CommentQuote
  • Project: Vasant Oasis, Sheth Builders, Andheri East, Mumbai
    Date of project launch: June 2011
    Start of project: March 2011
    Date of possession: December 2012.
    First Dead line miss: Dec'13
    Second Dead line miss: Dec'15
    Third Dead line miss: Dec'16
    Fourth Dead line miss: Dec'17
    Reason for Delay: Changes in project.
    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay: Dec'20

    Marol's premium residential project caught in layout row

    Vasant Oasis Buyers File Complaint Against Developer
    CommentQuote
  • Social Media Turns a Home for Protesting House Buyers

    CommentQuote
  • Bombay High Court tells developers of Thane project to keep 8 flats vacant till dispute's final hearing
    (*ttp://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report-bombay-high-court-tells-developers-of-thane-project-to-keep-8-flats-vacant-till-dispute-s-final-hearing-2044280)


    The Bombay High Court has directed Wadhwa Developers and three others, who have entered into a joint venture to construct a building at Thane, to keep eight flats vacant following a petition filed by five people who had paid the provisional booking amount for one of their projects. Justice Mridula Bhatkar said, "All the defendants (developers) are directed to keep 8 flats vacant in tower A, and not to part with their possession and not to create any third party right, title or interest in the flats till the suit is decided finally."



    The HC was hearing an appeal filed by five people through advocates Gautam Ankhad and Tushar Gujjar challenging the order of the Thane civil court. They had sought that the developers be directed to allot them their respective flats in the partly constructed building.


    In 2008, Terraform Realty, Everest Developers and Money Magnum Constructions wanted to construct a building for weaker sections under MMRDA's rental housing scheme. The plaintiffs (buyers) booked their flats and made a part payment, after which they were given allotment letters.


    However, the developers could not construct the building as they did not get a go ahead from the MMRDA. In 2012, they offered the plaintiffs a refund along with interest. The plaintiffs did not take back their money and wanted the flats as per the booking done with the developers.


    The developers thereafter entered into a joint venture with Wadhwa Developers for the construction. Wadhwa developers refused to acknowledge the rights of the plaintiffs and refused to give them the flats. They even sent a legal notice to the plaintiffs, terminating their letters of allotment and called upon them to take a refund with interest at 12%.


    The plaintiffs then approached the Thane civil court seeking that the developers be restrained from selling "their" flats to third parties. They even sought that the construction of the buildings be stayed.


    Ankhad argued that the plaintiffs had paid the initial amounts for the flats and for this, the initial developers had issued themletters of allotment showing the provisional booking. Moreover, one of the plaitiffs had raised a loan with a private bank against this letter.
    Ankhad further argued that although the developers could not avail the four FSI as the rental housing scheme did not take off, they are still entitled to one FSI and under it have one affordable housing scheme.


    Chetan Kapadia and SV Kale, counsels for the developers, argued that they are now entitled to consume only 1 FSI. Also, the bookings of plaintiffs' flats was provisional, subject to permissions of the competent authority and other government authorities.
    The judge observed, "The price of real estate and cost of construction shot up within the last 3 to 4 years and, therefore, the plaintiffs would not be in a position to acquire accommodation at the same rate when they booked the flats. Also, the defendants (developers) cannot be asked to stop the construction and cannot be injuncted from transferring, selling all the flats in the building as 15 flats are already booked and 70% construction of the building is complete."


    Justice Bhatkar observed that it was provisional bookings and the letters cannot be considered as letters of allotment in view of the footnote on them. "However, the correspondence shows that the defendants have assured the plaintiffs that they would allot them those flats subject to approval of the plans," noted the judge.


    However, Justice Bhatkar also observed that in view of the fact that the MMRDA had not approved the scheme and that the FSI was reduced, the cost of each flat also increased and the carpet area was reduced, cannot be doubted at this stage.
    CommentQuote
  • This is the problem of buying in a pre-launch project. There is no safeguard to the consumer that he will get a flat as per his booking. Yes if the price stagnates around same rate, then the builder will deliver. But if it spirals like the way it happened in 2010, then he will try to falter showing approvals issue.

    Now that the prices have gone up by around 3 times, when original booking was made, the builders will not try to get the original proposal approved as it means a huge loss. It definitely suits them to pay the amount with 12% interest as it hardly meant any outgo compared to the sale proceeds at the current rate for a new proposal.

    In any case, the original allottees shall not move from their ground and fight tooth and nail to get their flats, if not the same cost atleast at the same rate.
    CommentQuote
  • Project: Runwal Pearl project, Thane ( West)
    Date of project launch:
    Start of project: March
    Date of possession:
    First Dead line miss:
    Second Dead line miss:
    Reason for Delay:

    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:


    Notice to builder for giving residents smaller flats than promised
    CommentQuote
  • IN FOCUS - A menace called project delay
    CommentQuote
  • Project:La Citadel by Sheth Developers and Poonam Builders
    Date of project launch:
    Oshiwara in 2006.
    Start of project:
    Date of possession:
    First Dead line miss:
    Second Dead line miss:
    Reason for Delay:
    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:

    Flats we paid for in 2006 not even constructed, say buyers



    PARLIAMENT RATIFIES REAL ESTATE BILL
    The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Bill was approved by the Parliament on Tuesday, five days after its passage by the Rajya Sabha. It will now be difficult for promoters and builders to delay projects, as the Bill proposes imprisonment of up to three years besides monetary penalties for any violation of rules.The Bill is designed to protect consumer interest, ensure efficiency in all propertyrelated transactions, improve accountability of developers, and boost transparency.It provides for setting up of a Real Estate Regulatory Authorities (RERAs) which will ensure timely execution of projects. The RERAs will regulate transactions related to both residential and commercial projects, and ensure their timely completion and handover.
    CommentQuote

  • Project: Palazzo Kandivali's, East and West Builders, an RNA subsidiary
    Date of project launch: 2010
    Start of project: March
    Date of possession:
    First Dead line miss:
    Second Dead line miss:
    Reason for Delay:

    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:


    Builder dupes buyers of Rs 15 cr with fake 33-storey building plan

    CommentQuote
  • PALI MARKET REDEVELOPMENT HITS ANOTHER ROADBLOCK - Builder constructing tower on market plot, allege residents
    CommentQuote
  • THE DREADED DELAY
    CommentQuote
  • 0

    Project:Nisarga devloper
    Date of project launch:2012
    Start of project:2013
    Date of possession:2015
    First Dead line miss:2015 4th may
    Second Dead line miss:2016 4th may
    Reason for Delay:not providing the reason
    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:
    CommentQuote
  • New law could knock errant developers flat

    CommentQuote
  • Bldr faces protests from flat buyers for failure to complete projects


    Developer Says Wrong Info Being Spread

    Mumbai-based developer Kamla Landmarc, which gained prominence for its failed bid to own the IPL Deccan Chargers team in 2012, is facing protests from hundreds of flat buyers across the city

    Investors who booked apartments and office space four years ago have complained to police against the builder for cheating and misappropriation -each buyer paid amounts ranging from Rs 70 lakh to over Rs one crore. Projects haven't started or those which have do not have permission from BMC, they said. The property market is keenly observing the developments as the builder is believed to have an exposure of over Rs 2,000 crore.The confrontation came to a head when some flat purchasers held a dharna outside the developer's incomplete residential project in Mulund. The builder Jitendra Jain told TOI the delay is restricted to the Mulund project. “I have promised them flats in another project,“ he said.

    But around 30 disgruntled clients, who met TOI last week, said the delay was in projects across the suburbs. The Brahans Business Park in Andheri (E), for instance, has no occupa tion certificate, according to Mark D'Souza. He said part of his office space was sealed by BMC after it was found to be illegally constructed.

    “Many investors are from the Gulf and Africa,“ they said.Muscat-based Melwyn Menezes, who paid Rs 93 lakh for a flat in Bhandup, sent a complaint to the Mumbai police chief through the Indian embassy recently. He booked the flat in July 2012, but no building has come up yet.

    Mahalakshmi Dandapani, 73, said she sold her flat and booked another apartment in the builder's project Granduer in Mulund (W) in 2012. “I've paid Rs 23 lakh, but the building hasn't come up.I've been living with my daughter for 5 years,“ she said.

    Maharashtra Pradesh Congress Seva Dal leader Rakesh Shetty , spearheading the protest, said the investors have approached the economic offen ces wing. “We are expecting an FIR to be filed soon,“ he said. In a letter addressed to police commissioner Datta Padsalgikar, Shetty said the developer's modus operandi is to pay paltry sums to plot owners and induce them to be part of upcoming project. “Thereafter, the developer resorts to a publicity blitzkrieg assisted by a group of agents, who facilitate heavy bookings by luring gullible investors. After that the project is never completed. Almost all projects floated by the developer have stayed on paper,“ he said.

    Market sources described Kamla Landmarc as one of the `aggressive cowboy developers', which made its fortunes mainly in the Bandra-Khar area. Prior to 2012, civic chiefs had discretionary powers to grant extra areas free of FSI to builders. “Builders like Kamla benefited tremendously because of manipulation of saleable areas in premium localities,“ said sources. “The company knew how to make the best use of the BMC's building laws and innovatively constructed residential and commercial buildings on narrow plots in Bandra-Khar,“ they added. However, the realty firm is believed to have stopped its building projects in that area after the BMC's amended development control rules came into force in 2012. The new rules stipulate builders must pay a hefty premium to the corporation in exchange for 35% extra floor space index. “The company realised its projects in Bandra-Khar would no longer be feasible,“ said a source.

    Kamla Landmarc said in a statement: “Some people have been spreading baseless information about our 40-year-old company .We have delivered 36 projects in Mumbai and are relentlessly working to deliver others. We are constantly in touch with our investors in person or through respective consultants.“ The statement added, “ All our investors and purchasers have been offered alternate project or buyback, with a specific timeline for possession or re-payment with mutual consent. Due to changes in development control rules and unprecedented changes in policies, some amendments and rectifications were necessary to be incorporated in under-construction and upcoming projects.“ The builder warned his clients to “act on your own smartness and intelligence, rather than being wrongly instigated by some sadists who are taking lead for their personal benefits, extorting ransom from us.“




    CommentQuote

  • Project: RNA Corp, Kalina project
    Date of project launch:2010
    Start of project:2013
    Date of possession:2015
    First Dead line miss:
    Second Dead line miss:
    Reason for Delay:

    Many areas like ornamental projections, voids and flowerbeds were free of FSI when the project was approved.However, the amended development control rules of January 2012 included these areas in the building's FSI. The new law stipulates payment of a premium for using extra areas.
    Phase-1 Delay:
    Phase-2 Delay:
    Phase-3 Delay:



    Buyers in a fix as luxe project stalls


    In yet another case of flat buyers being left high and dry , work on a luxury residential project at Sunder Nagar, Kalina, has stalled since the past three years.Over 170 bankers, MNC professionals, financial sector employees and diamond traders, who booked apartments in RNA Address five years ago, are in a state of anxiety.

    Some of them moved the National Consumer Court last year, seeking their money back with interest from the builder, RNA Corp. But a legal case can take years to settle and the purchasers say their finances are stretched.

    The builder has blamed the municipal corporation for its January 2012 policy , which imposes a huge premium for extra areas--it said this levy is illegal, invalid and arbitrary because the Kalina project was cleared years before the new policy came into force.

    Since bookings for the project commenced in 2010, most home buyers paid over Rs 1.2 to 1.5 crore each or 60% of the flat price. Some first-time buyers who have been staying in rented apartments took a double whammy-paying interest on home loans as well as incurring huge rents.

    The builder has already sold more than half of the 294 apartments and believed to have collected over Rs 200 crore as initial booking amounts from the clients. The project comprises seven 13 storey towers on a 3.5 acre plot near the Mumbai University complex in Kalina. Many of the buyers work in the nearby Bandra Kurla Complex and this project was considered ideal for its proximity to this business district.

    Builder Anubhav Aggarwal of RNA Group told TOI it's in his interest to complete the project. “I am a victim myself because of bureaucratic delays,'' he said, blaming the BMC for the delay . Aggarwal said many areas like ornamental projections, voids and flowerbeds were free of FSI when the project was approved.However, the amended development control rules of January 2012 included these areas in the building's FSI. The new law stipulates payment of a premium for using extra areas.

    “The BMC has not accepted the building concession file we submitted. It wants us to remove the flower beds or add them in the building's floor space index (FSI),'' he said.

    Claiming that his firm had invested substantial money in the project, Aggarwal said he had already procured civil aviation and environmental permissions, and paid Rs 21 crore as premium to the state housing authority (Mhada).“We are planning to drag BMC to court,'' he said. However, one of the aggrieved flat buyers debunked the builder's claim: “He has been telling us such stories since 2014 and imploring us to give him two weeks, two months. Blaming the BMC is just a ploy.'' The promised delivery deadline was mid-to-end 2014, but nearly two-thirds of the work is still pending. Construction of the towers stopped in April 2013 at the third slab because RNA initially claimed it did not have the requisite permission. None of the purchasers wanted to be identified for this story as they feared a backlash. “Initially , RNA officials brushed off the delay , blaming bureaucratic lethargy . Later they talked about a larger malaise in the civic approving authorities that no builder was receiving permissions. They continued making false promises of per missions almost received and construction to begin within three months,'' they said.

    A service professional who booked a flat in February 2011 said he had already paid Rs 1.60 crore for a 3 BHK apartment.“Since 2013, I have been chasing them, but have been getting only false assurances. My family is really concerned since we are paying Rs one lakh a month for our rental accommodation.'' A woman who booked a flat with her husband, said, “The builder projected a rosy picture and pursued us to invest here six years ago. We paid Rs 2.45 crore, but now they do not respond to our emails. Where do we go? What do we do?'' Another flat buyer, a banker, who paid Rs 1.2 crore, said the builder has sold many flats and claimed all approvals are in place. Among those affected are 14 residents of Siddesh society , a Mhada building, which was demolished by the builder in 2010 as part of the redevelopment project. “Since March 2015, rental cheques have frequently bounced and since October last, the builder stopped paying rent,'' said a member.








    CommentQuote