Noida Extension Buyers Take on Builders

Home buyers who have invested in Noida Extension Real Estate projects are connecting online through discussion forums, facebook and other websites to vent out frustration against the builder lobby. Almost 100 people have signed up as members of a Facebook group that calls itself, 'Noida Extension Owners and Members Association'. The members include professionals from all walks of life.

NEOMA - Noida Extension Owners And Members Association is Noida extension owners and member association. The purpose and objective of NEOMA is to keep updated to all the Future residents of the Noida /Noida Ext. based on the users feedback. User can make their decision, owners can raise their voice in case of any issues.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court - Noida Extension News

Guyz look at Zee news. Noida extn ko rahat nahi....

नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को नंदीग्राम बनते नहीं देख सकते: SC

*नई दिल्ली। *सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने आज नोएडा एक्सटेंशन जमीन अधिग्रहण मामले में कहा
कि नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को दूसरा नंदीग्राम नहीं बनने दिया जाएगा। कोर्ट ने अपनी
टिप्पणी में कहा कि सरकार को जमीन अधिग्रहण को लेकर अपनी मानसिकता बदलनी होगी।

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार से पूछा कि खेती की जमीन अधिग्रहण करने से
पहले क्या इस बात की कोशिश की गई कि बंजर जमीन का अधिग्रहण पहले किया जाए। इस
दौरान कोर्ट में सरकार और किसानों के तरफ के पक्ष कोर्ट में मौजूद थे। सुप्रीम
कोर्ट ने इस मामले की जल्द सुनवाई करने से इंकार करते हुए कहा कि इसकी सुनवाई 5
जुलाई को होगी।Guyz look at Zee news. Noida extn ko rahat nahi....

नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को नंदीग्राम बनते नहीं देख सकते: SC

*नई दिल्ली। *सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने आज नोएडा एक्सटेंशन जमीन अधिग्रहण मामले में कहा
कि नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को दूसरा नंदीग्राम नहीं बनने दिया जाएगा। कोर्ट ने अपनी
टिप्पणी में कहा कि सरकार को जमीन अधिग्रहण को लेकर अपनी मानसिकता बदलनी होगी।

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार से पूछा कि खेती की जमीन अधिग्रहण करने से
पहले क्या इस बात की कोशिश की गई कि बंजर जमीन का अधिग्रहण पहले किया जाए। इस
दौरान कोर्ट में सरकार और किसानों के तरफ के पक्ष कोर्ट में मौजूद थे। सुप्रीम
कोर्ट ने इस मामले की जल्द सुनवाई करने से इंकार करते हुए कहा कि इसकी सुनवाई 5
जुलाई को होगी।Guyz look at Zee news. Noida extn ko rahat nahi....

नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को नंदीग्राम बनते नहीं देख सकते: SC

*नई दिल्ली। *सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने आज नोएडा एक्सटेंशन जमीन अधिग्रहण मामले में कहा
कि नोएडा एक्सटेंशन को दूसरा नंदीग्राम नहीं बनने दिया जाएगा। कोर्ट ने अपनी
टिप्पणी में कहा कि सरकार को जमीन अधिग्रहण को लेकर अपनी मानसिकता बदलनी होगी।

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने उत्तर प्रदेश सरकार से पूछा कि खेती की जमीन अधिग्रहण करने से
पहले क्या इस बात की कोशिश की गई कि बंजर जमीन का अधिग्रहण पहले किया जाए। इस
दौरान कोर्ट में सरकार और किसानों के तरफ के पक्ष कोर्ट में मौजूद थे। सुप्रीम
कोर्ट ने इस मामले की जल्द सुनवाई करने से इंकार करते हुए कहा कि इसकी सुनवाई 5
जुलाई को होगी।
Read more
Reply
543 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • Originally Posted by saurabh2011
    For existing investors it will be better if not to pay any further installment (neither from own account nor from bank installments) at least for next 4-5 months, I think till 4-5 months all the HC decision will be come out for all filed land/village cases of NE, then situation in NE will be more clear. After that it will be easy for existing investors to see which projects are completely free from problems, start further installment only after that not before in NE. If even after 6 months situation is just same as right now without any clarity then better to withdraw invested amount from NE project. I think only Gaur City-1 is looking safe at this time in NE (can not say confirmly but it looks)

    For new investors it will be better to purchase in NE only after 2 years (ie 6 months after UP Elections) even if at that time cost of flats increased to 25% in NE because at this time it is safe to earn 20% interest from BANK FD in place of NE, so actual extra burden will be hardly 5% after 2 years.



    But builder will put penalty if installment not paid on time as they are trying to get as much money as possible.
    CommentQuote
  • And where do we get 20% return on Fixed Deposit in one year.....:)
    CommentQuote
  • And where do we get 20% return on FD in one year.... and what about the price escalations due to construction cost hike, circle rates hikes etc.... if project is not disputed its always better to buy it earlier as
    you get quite cheap and flat of your choice.......
    CommentQuote
  • Please read carefully -

    Amrapali Golf Homes -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Leisure Park-GH02 -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Dream Valley -> Only no stay, not talking about litigation.
    Amrapali Centurian Park -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Leisure Valley-GH01 -> no litigation and no stay.

    So even tech zone is also not safe. Now rest of farmers would have approached HC.


    Originally Posted by babhishek14
    Please read carefully .. it clearly says that there is not litigation and stay order.. infact the projects in that area of Tech Zone 4 are most safe projects.....
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by babhishek14
    And where do we get 20% return on FD in one year.... and what about the price escalations due to construction cost hike, circle rates hikes etc.... if project is not disputed its always better to buy it earlier as
    you get quite cheap and flat of your choice.......


    Quite rite...no risk no gain...take calculated risk...rest is luck.... hone ko to bina dispute ke bhi builer 5 sal se pahle possesion nahi deta from first launch date......its up to you...keep horizen of 5 years..n
    invest in safe projects(in NE),already sold projects,Big builders...
    there are many fulfilling this criteria in NE..if priject is already 70% sold and there is no dispute on project land and the farmers having land of that project has already accepted the compensation..there is not point to avoid such projects if you are willing to invest..
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by ranjeetks
    Please read carefully -

    Amrapali Golf Homes -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Leisure Park-GH02 -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Dream Valley -> Only no stay, not talking about litigation.
    Amrapali Centurian Park -> no litigation and no stay.
    Amrapali Leisure Valley-GH01 -> no litigation and no stay.

    So even tech zone is also not safe. Now rest of farmers would have approached HC.


    Even La Residentia has a similar document though its not on the website...so the fate of Tech Zone projects cannot be decided on this basis..
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by babhishek14
    And where do we get 20% return on FD in one year.... and what about the price escalations due to construction cost hike, circle rates hikes etc.... if project is not disputed its always better to buy it earlier as
    you get quite cheap and flat of your choice.......


    I think you do not read my comments fully , I say if after 2 years there is 25% price appreciation is there in NE then in 2 years from bank FD we can earn 20% total interest, so actual different will be just 5% after 2 years + lots of mental peace + no risk. I do not say 20% ROI per annual, I says just total interest got.

    As for NE if you are thinking that price will be appreciated to 50% after 2 years then it will never be happen because after that what will be price of Expressway / Noida 7x...... Over supplied under construction societies. Price of Noida Extension will always be remains much less than Noida projects and when Noida new launches are not getting even 15% price appreciation per year then how you can expect it for 25% per year for NE. Ground reality is that from last 2 years total rate appreciation in Noida 7x is even less than FD ROI. And as for NE 15 months before new launches was at the rate of 1700 PSF in NE and at this time several new society advertising new launching rates 1530 PSF + Discount (Ajanara Le) ie 10% depreciation. Do not close eyes with facts.
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by gaur_uni
    Quite rite...no risk no gain...take calculated risk...rest is luck.... hone ko to bina dispute ke bhi builer 5 sal se pahle possesion nahi deta from first launch date......its up to you...keep horizen of 5 years..n
    invest in safe projects(in NE),already sold projects,Big builders...
    there are many fulfilling this criteria in NE..if priject is already 70% sold and there is no dispute on project land and the farmers having land of that project has already accepted the compensation..there is not point to avoid such projects if you are willing to invest..



    I think most of the people has booked flat as they need to live there. They were fed up with the problem in rented accommodation. Its not a gamble as you mentioned where person put money, if win then get profit and if loose, loose everything.
    CommentQuote
  • No worry & Wait for sometime is the key now!

    Let's analyse it from different angle:
    1) Farmers ultimate motive is to get most out of more compensation. If SC gives them land back which they don't want then they will settle with the builders out of the court by withdrawing a huge compensation. This compensation will be boiled down on us & the NE charm will get lost after that.
    2) Banking Aspect: SC can't ignore the financial implications of the decision & the honourable court knows how much impact will have on the Banking System, if the NE land denotified fully. if you see the SC statement, it has quashed Govt., Authority, Builders, Nexus but still not taken the end user into account...
    3) Political Aspect: since most of the villagers are somehow connected & motivated by the Ploiticians, side by side one can't ignore the legal&illegal stake of the politicians in these projects which eventually will pressurize farmers to settle out of the court with the builders to the The stake...
    Things are hazy now... But the result i am seeing is positive for us as a flat owner...
    CommentQuote
  • Saurabh - This situation is only applicable if you have 100% money and you opted cash down payment.. then you can opt FD then Noida extension flats…..

    But in 80% cases, investor/end users don’t have money and they always get for 70-80% amount from bank home loan so your calculation is not good for these maximum cases… If someone know that one specific project (any where) is safe and available with X amount then why one should wait for 2 years for X+25% amount and that too with home loan.. means more loan amount and more interest payment to bank.
    CommentQuote
  • Opinion on SC observation

    Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is neither to encourage people to invest in NE nor predict that everything will be fine in NE projects. I have invested in NE project and I am also scared about the future of NE projects but I really do not like reports presenting incorrect facts.

    I feel very aggrieved and frustrated the way news is presented by the media and the way people react to it without giving it due attention and thought. Primarily, it is responsibility of the media to present news with correct facts and in accurate manner. Reaction of people is understandable considering that it is not possible for a large bulk of people to understand news after analyzing its technical aspects.

    If a channel presents a program on destruction of earth claiming that end of earth is near citing some collusion of planets, even a literate person may not be able to scrutinize the news taking into consideration its technical aspects. People are expected to be scared. (Though it is a different thing that people have stopped believing a news channel because it has lost its credibility for telecasting such news only.)

    Some times, I think UP Police was right in recent treatment meted out to reporters. I personally feel regulating media is as important as fight against corruption.

    Straight to the point:

    The news telecast by a news channel yesterday and reports published on news site and in newspapers subsequently claimed Supreme Court is very strict on Noida Extension and future of NE is in grave danger.

    I read the entire report and SC no where mentioned Noida Extension. The SC was discussing a particular case only (Shahberi Case) and it made general remark regarding the land acquisition done by States through emergency clause(Section 17 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894) depriving farmers to raise their objection under section 5A of Land Acquisition Act.


    It is important to note that SC was passing remark in a case where land was acquired using emergency clause and where there was no such urgency though it is still open for authority to prove before SC that there was indeed a situation to invoke Section 17.

    I am not sure under what section land was acquired in other parts of NE but if land in other parts of NE was not acquired using section 17, then facts will differ drastically from Shahberi acquisition case.

    So it is very important to know that under what clause land was acquired in other parts of NE before making prediction about the future of NE and jumping to the conclusion.

    Though I mentioned in one or two of my previous posts that future of all NE projects will be same. But after reading Shahberi case completely, I am giving a different opinion.

    I came across following fact presented by Greater Noida Authority while reading Shahberi case.

    “The Builders Residential Scheme-BRS-01/08-09 did not invoke appropriate response and thus considering, that the village Shahberi was contiguous to the land acquired in village Aimnabad by notification under Section 6 dated 12.12.2006, Village Bisrakh under Section 6 dated 30.6.2008 and village Patwari under Section 6 dated 30.6.2008; the land use of village Shahberi was changed in Master Plan 2021 after giving public notice and inviting objections.”

    Thus I believe that land in Aimnabad, Bisrakh and Patwari was acquired under Section 6 and farmers were given an opportunity to raise their objections. Thus fate of projects launched on land belonging to above villages may be different.

    The facts of Nandigram are also different from NE. SC has just made observation that it will not allow repeat of Nandigram in other states and SC has asked following questions.

    “Did you give an opportunity to the farmers to raise their grievances before acquiring their land?

    What are you offering them in return?

    Are you going to give them a flat each in the multistoreyed residential complex?”

    So if authority satisfies SC that they are compensating them enough, then SC may pass judgment in favor of authority.
    Besides, SC has asked government in the form of suggestion to dump Land Acquisition Act and that’s for
    entire country. And most important part of the observation made by SC is:

    “The court said it would not deviate from the statutory principles. But at the same time, it expressed concern over the manner in which agricultural land was being acquired without surveying availability of barren land.”

    Even SC has limitation. SC has clearly mentioned that it would not deviate from the statutory principles and thus it will review whether GNA acquired land in violation of any statutory principles laid down in Land Acquisition Act or not. It will review procedural compliance of the rules laid down in the Act.

    I came across other facts also while reading shahberi judgement that I would like to share here. Many are claiming that farmers’ have been deprived of their land but few petitioners in Shahberi Case are:
    Modern Public School
    Arya Sahitya Prachar Trust
    Radha Swami Satsang Beas

    I have no idea how many petitioners are original tenure holders.

    Further, SC has asked for detailed hearing that will take place on 5th July.

    So let’s see what SC finally decides. But even if SC passes judgment against authority, don’t start pointing guns immediately before being aware of correct facts such as section under which land was acquired in different villages.
    CommentQuote
  • SC refuses interim relief to Noida Extension developers

    Criticising the Uttar Pradesh government for acquiring prime agricultural land in Noida Extension to build luxury flats, the Supreme Court on Monday refused to give any interim relief to the developers who had sought a stay on the Allahabad High Court judgment denotifying the acquisition. The apex court also asked the developers to return the land to its owners.



    Questioning the invocation of an urgency clause by the Mayawati government that bars farmers from raising objections, a vacation bench headed by justice P Sathasivam said the matter needed to be examined so as to prevent situations similar to Nandigram (West Bengal), where the invocation of such an urgency clause had led to violence by farmers.

    “Whose residential use are these flats for? Who is building them? What are the prices?.. We want to go into details of the case. This urgency clause is not automatically invoked... We do not want more Nandigrams,” the court observed.

    “We will not keep our eyes closed. You take it (agricultural land) from one side and give it to the other. This has to go and if it does not go this court will step in to ensure that. Was any effort made to find alternative lands before acquiring agricultural land?” the bench observed during the hearing of four appeals filed by the Uttar Pradesh government, the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority (GNIDA) and two developers — Supertech and Amrapali.

    The Mayawati government had allegedly acquired 57 acre in Shahberi village without any public hearing in 2009.

    Under Sections 4-9 of the Land Acquisition Act, the government has to notify the land it wants to acquire in public interest, invite public response and hold a public hearing. Then it has to pay the compensation and issue a gazette order. In this case, the administration allegedly skipped the public hearing and acquired the land under the ‘emergency’ clause for industrial development. But instead of industrial development, the administration handed over a chunk of the land to builders including Supertech, Mahagun and Amrapali. These builders immediately opened offices, got their maps approved and starting accepting bookings for flats.

    The builders challenged the high court order dated May 12 that had set aside the state government’s notifications issued on June 10 and November 9 last year to acquire the land, and all consequential actions taken by the Authority with regard to the land. The petitions said the land was acquired under the Builders Residential Scheme for a planned development as against the haphazard and unauthorised development made by the unofficial owners.

    The petitions added that the high court failed to notice that only a handful of the respondents were tenure-holders and most of them were either unauthorised developers, plot-holders or purchasers of plots intending to carry out unauthorised constructions over the land in dispute.
    Amrapali Smart City stated that the high court failed to notice that out of the total 156.903 hectares acquired, owners of nearly 70% of the land had not challenged the acquisition proceedings, while out of the 211 landowners, as many as 111 had accepted the compensation.

    “The high court erred in not noticing that Shahberi village was notified as part of Greater Noida as early as February 21, 1994 and as such there could not have been any inter se sale transactions contrary to the provisions of the UP Industrial Area Development Act, 1976,” the petitions filed on behalf of counsel ADN.Rao stated. According to Rao, swapping of land use is permitted in the master plan provided the percentage of land use in each category (namely industrial, commercial and residential or green belt) is maintained.

    SC refuses interim relief to Noida Extension developers
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by fritolay_ps
    Saurabh - This situation is only applicable if you have 100% money and you opted cash down payment.. then you can opt FD then Noida extension flats…..

    But in 80% cases, investor/end users don’t have money and they always get for 70-80% amount from bank home loan so your calculation is not good for these maximum cases… If someone know that one specific project (any where) is safe and available with X amount then why one should wait for 2 years for X+25% amount and that too with home loan.. means more loan amount and more interest payment to bank.


    Pre EMI paid to bank in 2 years will be even more than FD rate earned because at this time HOME LOAN Rates has been appreciated to 12%+ , so as per this atleast 24% amount will be paid as PRE EMI to Bank. Calculations are same even for FD or in case of HOME LOAN. In case of FD we are getting money for future investment but in HOME LOAN we are spending money in terms of PRE EMI to keep that investment but actually profit/loss balance sheet is near about same.
    CommentQuote
  • I need opinion of people on following point.

    In worst scenario all acqusition is denotified. Farmers are least intersted in retaining the land. All they want is greater compensation. GNA has acquired land from farmers at around 1000 Rs. per square meter or even less than that and alloted the land to builders at around 11,000 Rs. per square meter.

    Now in worst situation if land is denotified, builders will get in touch with farmers and even if builders pay farmers half the price at which they purchased land from authority (Say Rs. 5000 per square meter), I think farmers will be more than happy with that.

    Only disadvantage for the builders will be that they were supposed to make payment to GNA in installments but they will have to pay entire amount to farmers at once.


    Originally Posted by udayaudy
    Let's analyse it from different angle:
    1) Farmers ultimate motive is to get most out of more compensation. If SC gives them land back which they don't want then they will settle with the builders out of the court by withdrawing a huge compensation. This compensation will be boiled down on us & the NE charm will get lost after that.Let's analyse it from different angle:
    1) Farmers ultimate motive is to get most out of more compensation. If SC gives them land back which they don't want then they will settle with the builders out of the court by withdrawing a huge compensation. This compensation will be boiled down on us & the NE charm will get lost after that.
    CommentQuote
  • Sir, but it's Industrial land as per master plan so to convert residential after purchase from farmers black money also required




    Originally Posted by udayaudy
    Let's analyse it from different angle:
    1) Farmers ultimate motive is to get most out of more compensation. If SC gives them land back which they don't want then they will settle with the builders out of the court by withdrawing a huge compensation. This compensation will be boiled down on us & the NE charm will get lost after that.

    Sir, but it's Industrial land as per master plan so to convert residential after purchase from farmers black money also required
    CommentQuote