Himachal Pradesh RERA Orders Unimaxx Builders To Pay ₹6.42 Lakh Pending Dues To Homebuyers
The Himachal Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has upheld an execution order directing Unimaxx Builders to refund Rs 6.42 lakh to homebuyers, holding that objections raised by the developer were a “deliberate attempt to prevent the enforcement of a valid and final order” and were “patently misconceived.”
The authority, comprising Chairperson R.D. Dhiman and Members Amit Kashyap and Vidur Mehta, ruled that the refund was payable under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, which grants allottees an absolute right to seek a refund along with statutory interest where possession is not delivered by the promoter.
The dispute arose out of a 2018 complaint filed by Vandana Tuteja and Vijay Kumar Tuteja against the Builder regarding the project "Ansal Meadows, Arun Hills." On April 27, 2019, the Town and Country Planning Department (TCP) of Himachal Pradesh directed the developers to refund Rs 6 lakh with interest. The developers issued eight cheques to fulfill this order, and some of these were dishonored.
Execution procedures were started in 2024 to recover the decretal amount from various judgment debtors. This included project-related developers and landowners, as the reimbursement had not been issued. Some judgment debtors challenged the execution, contending that they were unfairly targeted, even though they had not received any booking sums from the complainants.
The homebuyers contended that a significant portion of the interest and principal remained unpaid even though they had received partial payments throughout Sectionthe Section Act proceedings.
Unimaxx Builders, on the other hand, argued that they were not the original "promoters" and that other partners had deceived them. They further contended that the current execution was an "abuse of the process of law" aslaw," allottees had withdrawn their NI Act petitions before a Lok Adalat in Gurugram, settling the entire dispute.
The authority rejected the developers' attempts at shifting the blame or reopening the case's merits. The authority stated that executing court must not go beyond the decree and that several objections are frequently filed "in abuse of process of law."
The Authority remarked that "The objections raised...are nothing but a deliberate attempt to prevent the enforcement of valid and final order."
It further emphasized that the developers were not absolved from the entire statutory interest owed under RERA and the withdrawal of NI Act cases at Lok Adalat only addressed the specified amounts.
In order to allow the decree-holder to reap the fruits of his decree, the Authority stressed that the execution of decree should not be made futile on mere technicalities.
The authority emphasized that the liability to reimburse could not be questioned at the execution stage and that the decision dated 27.04.2019 had attained “finality.”
It made it clear that the purpose of execution procedures is to ensure compliance rather than to re-evaluate rights that have already been established.
Consequently, the authority ordered Unimaxx Builders to deposit the remaining Rs 6,42,488 within 30 days after rejecting the developers' objections. The court also warned them of coercive actions in case of non-compliance.Case Title: Vandana Tuteja & Anr. v. M/s Unimaxx Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.
Case Number: Execution Petition No. 27/2024 in Complaint No. HIM/TP/HPRERA/Complaints/2018/VOL-I/2018
Citation: 2026 LLBiz RERA (HP) 5
For Allottees: Naresh Kumar Sharma (For Decree Holders);
For Developers: Gurjeet Kaur (For JD No. 1 & 2); Sameer Thakur (For JD No. 4)