[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Signatureglobal (India) Ltd vs Praveen Kumar Gupta on 24 December, 2025
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
208
1. RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&M)
Date of decision: December 24th, 2025
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Praveen Kumar Gupta
.....Respondent
2. RERA-APPL-100-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Laxmi Narain and another
.....Respondents
3. RERA-APPL-101-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Balbir Singh Narval
.....Respondent
4. RERA-APPL-103-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Rampal Singh Chauhan
.....Respondent
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2025.12.24 18:45
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 2
5. RERA-APPL-108-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Renu Arora
.....Respondent
6. RERA-APPL-110-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Komal
.....Respondent
7. RERA-APPL-112-2025 (O&M)
M/s Sternal Buildcon Private Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Niharika Mukherjee
.....Respondent
8. RERA-APPL-113-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Susheela Sangwan and another
.....Respondents
9. RERA-APPL-121-2025 (O&M)
M/s Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
.....Appellant
Versus
Narender Kumar
.....Respondent
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2025.12.24 18:45
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 3
10. RERA-APPL-122-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Shahana and another
.....Respondents
11. RERA-APPL-123-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Nikhil Walia and another
.....Respondents
12. RERA-APPL-125-2025 (O&M)
M/s Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.
.....Appellant
Versus
Akhil Jain and another
.....Respondents
13. RERA-APPL-129-2025 (O&M)
M/s Sternal Buildcon Pvt. Ltd.
.....Appellant
Versus
Kavita Mittal and another
.....Respondents
14. RERA-APPL-135-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Devroop Guha
.....Respondent
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2025.12.24 18:45
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 4
15. RERA-APPL-198-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Vashisht Arora
.....Respondent
16. RERA-APPL-200-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Gursharan Kaur Chadha
.....Respondent
17. RERA-APPL-220-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global (India) Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Meena Godhvani and another
.....Respondents
18. RERA-APPL-221-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global Homes Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Remzee William and others
.....Respondents
19. RERA-APPL-222-2025 (O&M)
M/s Signature Global Homes Limited
.....Appellant
Versus
Neelima Sharma
.....Respondent
PUNEET SACHDEVA
2025.12.24 18:45
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 5
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate and
Mr. Kunal Dawar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohit Sangam,
Ms. Rubina Virmani, Ms. Prachi Gupta and
Ms. Radhika Mehta, Advocates
for the appellant.
Ms. Meenakshi Dogra, Advocate (through V.C.)
for the respondent in RERA-APPL-108-2025.
Mr. Anjan Preet Singh and Mr. Shubhnit Hans, Advocates
for respondent in RERA-APPL-112-2025.
Mr. Rahul Bhargava and Mr. Chetan Bansal, Advocates
for the respondents in RERA-APPL-121-2025 and
RERA-APPL-125-2025.
Mr. Ankit Chauhan, Advocate
for the respondents in RERA-APPL-122-2025.
Mr. Raj Kumar Malik, Advocate
for respondent Nos.1 and 2 in RERA-APPL-221-2025.
Mr. Ankit Chahal, Advocate (through V.C.)
for the respondent in RERA-APPL-222-2025.
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
1. This order will dispose of the above-mentioned 19 appeals as
common issues of law/facts arise in all the appeals. A common order dated
05.06.2025 was passed by the Appellate Tribunal in RERA Appeal Nos.92,
100, 101, 103, 108, 110, 112, 113, 121, 122, 123 and 129 of 2025. The said
common order has been challenged in the present appeals along with the
order passed by the Regulatory Authority.
2. RERA Appeal No.125 of 2025 has been filed challenging order
dated 02.06.2025 passed by the Appellate Tribunal as well as the order of
Regulatory Authority. RERA Appeal No.135 of 2025 has been filed
challenging the order dated 23.07.2025 passed by the Appellate Tribunal as
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 6
well as the order of the Regulatory Authority. RERA Appeal Nos.198 and
200 of 2025 have been filed challenging a common order dated 02.08.2025
passed by the Appellate Tribunal along with the orders passed by the
Regulatory Authority. RERA Appeal No.220 of 2025 has been filed
challenging the order dated 26.08.2025 passed by the Appellate Tribunal
along with the order passed by the Regulatory Authority. In RERA Appeal
Nos.221 and 222 of 2025, a common order dated 26.08.2025 was passed by
the Appellate Tribunal which order is under challenge in the said two
appeals along with the orders passed by the Regulatory Authority. In all the
cases, common issues of law/facts arise and, as would be apparent from the
subsequent part of the present order, the orders passed by the Appellate
Tribunal in all the cases deserve to be set aside and the matters deserve to be
remanded to the Appellate Tribunal on a short point. With the consent of all,
RERA-APPL No.92 of 2025 is being taken up as the lead case and the
facts/documents have been noticed from the same.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT:
3. Learned senior counsel for the appellant in all the cases has
submitted that in all the cases, there is a specific agreement between the
appellant and the allottee. Specific reference has been made to the flat
buyer's agreement (page 119 of the paper book of RERA Appeal No.92 of
2025) which has been entered into between the appellant and the allottee
Praveen Kumar Gupta to highlight the fact that as per clause 5.1, the
possession was to be delivered within 60 days from the date of issuance of
occupancy certificate of the flat to the allottee, subject to force majeure
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 7
circumstances. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has further referred
to clause 19 to show that "force majeure" has been specifically defined in
the agreement itself and the same also includes Court orders/directions from
any governmental or statutory authority and epidemics as well as any
legislation or rule or regulation made or issued by the government authority
restricting the developer from complying with any of the terms and
conditions of the agreement. Further, specific reference has also been made
to clause 19.2 which specifically provides that the developer shall not be
held responsible or liable for not performing any of its obligations or
undertakings provided therein, if such performance is prevented due to
"force majeure" conditions. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has also
referred to clause 'N' (page 122 of the paper book) to highlight the fact that
the parties were bound by the terms and conditions of the said agreement.
4. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has further argued that
even as per the model buyer's agreement provided by the Haryana Real
Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules 2017, clause 7.1, which is with
respect to handing over possession of plot/unit/apartment, specifically
provides that in case there is delay on account of "force majeure", Court
orders, Government Policy/guidelines, decisions affecting the regular
development of the real estate project etc., then in such situations, the
allottee agrees that the promoter shall be entitled to the extension of time for
delivery of possession of the plot/unit/apartment. Learned senior counsel has
further referred to the grounds of appeal (page 62 of RERA Appeal No.92 of
2025) to highlight the fact that the relevant clauses of the buyer's agreement
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 8
were not only relied upon by the appellant to contend that there was no delay
on its part, but rather even the said clauses were reproduced in the grounds
of appeals. It is submitted that a perusal of the impugned order dated
05.06.2025 would show that the said agreement, which is an admitted
document between the parties, or its clauses have not been considered by the
Appellate Tribunal while deciding the appeal filed by the appellant. It is
submitted that it is a matter of settled law that once there is a specific
contract between the parties, then it is the terms of the said contract which
would govern the rights of the parties, more so, when the allottees have not
even challenged the said agreement or any of its clauses on the ground of
same being unconscionable or illegal and are rather claiming their rights
under the said agreement. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has
further referred to clause 6.1 of the buyer's agreement to show that the right
which is being claimed by the allottee is with respect to possession being
given on or before 20.08.2021, as per clause 6.1(i), in the case of Praveen
Kumar Gupta. It is submitted that in the said circumstances, it was necessary
for the Appellate Tribunal to have considered the clauses of the agreement
so as to determine the rights and liabilities of the parties.
5. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant had, on
22.12.2025 produced two charts giving the details on the basis of which the
extension/benefit of construction ban etc. was required to be granted to the
appellant. The said charts were taken on record as Mark 'A' and Mark 'B'
and were handed over to the counsel for the respondent(s)/respondents.
Chart Mark 'A' is annexed as Annexure A-1 along with the present order
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 9
and chart Mark 'B' is annexed as Annexure A-2 along with the present
order.
6. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has submitted that in
Mark 'B', reference has been made to all the notifications and orders of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court during which the construction was banned in the
National Capital Region and also the details of the notification at the time
when COVID pandemic was prevalent. It is highlighted that the first COVID
wave was from 25.03.2020 upto 24.09.2020 and the second COVID wave
was from 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021. It is submitted that even the benefit of
the second COVID wave and also of the period during which, as per orders
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and orders passed by the other
authorities, the construction in the National Capital area had been stayed, has
not been given by the Tribunal, although the agreement between the parties
specifically provides for the same. It is submitted that under Chart 'A', the
details of the days of which the benefit is required to be given have also been
calculated in each case and thus, in case the same is taken into consideration,
then the appeals filed by the appellant deserve to be allowed. It is argued that
since the agreement and its clauses have not been taken into consideration,
thus, the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority deserve to be set
aside and the matters deserve to be remanded to the Appellate Tribunal for
fresh decision.
7. Learned senior counsel for the appellant has further submitted
that as far as the judgment in the case of M/s Pragatej Builders and
Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus Mr. Abhishek Anuj Sukhadia and Ors.
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 10
reported as 2024 NCBHC-AS 4357 is concerned, in the said case the due
date had elapsed prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and it was in the said
background that it was observed that COVID-19 pandemic lockdown which
was declared subsequently cannot come to the aid of the appellant for
claiming any relief with respect to payment of interest. It is submitted that
thus the said judgment is on completely different facts and does not apply in
the present case, as all the notifications/orders relied upon by the appellant
are prior to the due date of possession. Learned senior counsel for the
appellant has further submitted that Section 6 of the Real Estate (Regulation
and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the RERA Act')
provides for extension of registration and does not deal with the rights and
liabilities of the appellant and the allottee inter se and thus it is the specific
terms of the agreement which would govern the rights of the parties inter se.
It is submitted that even as per the explanation in Section 6 of the RERA
Act, which has been considered by the Appellate Tribunal, it has specifically
been stated that any other calamity caused by nature affecting the regular
development of a real estate project would also be included within the
definition of "force majeure". It has been submitted that the COVID first
wave has been taken into consideration by the Authority for granting
exemption and also keeping in view the explanation given in Section 6, even
the COVID second wave, which was from 01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 should
also have been taken into consideration for extending the time for giving
possession and for the said period also, no interest could have been claimed
by the respondent(s) or awarded by the Court. It is submitted that at any rate,
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 11
the Appellate Tribunal has not taken into consideration the terms of the
agreement and has not even observed that the terms of the said agreement
would not apply in the present case.
ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT(S):
8. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, have
submitted that certain calculations made in the chart are not correct and it is
further submitted that even in case the clauses of the agreement are taken
into consideration, then also, the respondents-allottees would be liable for
substantial relief. It is submitted that some of the documents which have
been relied upon by the appellant in the present appeal and also before the
Appellate Tribunal were not annexed along with the written statement and
has submitted that in case the matter is to be remanded, then all the pleas, as
are available to the respondents on the basis of the agreement(s) and on other
aspects, be kept open. It is submitted that remand of the case should not be
construed as an estoppel against the respondents from raising the said pleas.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS:
9. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has
perused the paper book.
10. The fact that a specific flat buyers agreement has been entered
into the between the appellant and the respondent-allottees in each of the
cases has not been disputed before this Court. The agreement entered into
between the present appellant and Praveen Kumar Gupta in RERA Appeal
No.92-2025 has been placed on record at page 119 of the paper book. Clause
'N' (page 122), clause 5.1 (page 130), clause 6.1 (page 132) and clause 19
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 12
(page 145) of the said agreement are reproduced hereunder:-
"N. The Parties, relying on the confirmations,
representations and assurances of each other to faithfully
abide by all the terms, conditions and stipulations contained
in this Agreement and all applicable laws, are now willing to
enter into this Agreement on the terms and conditions.
appearing hereinafter."
"5.1 Within 60 (sixty) days from the date of issuance of
Occupancy Certificate, the Developer shall offer the
possession of the Said Flat to the Allotee(s), Subject to Force
Majeure circumstances, receipt of Occupancy Certificate
and Allotee(s) having timely complied with all its obligations,
formalities or documentation, as prescribed by Developer in
terms of the Agreement and not being in default under any
part hereof including but not limited to the timely payment
of installments as per the Payment Plan, stamp duty and
registration charges, the Developer shall offer possession of
the Said Flat to the Allotee(s) within a period of 4 (four)
years from the date of approval of building plans or grant of
environment clearance, (hereinafter referred to as the
"Commencement Date"), whichever is later."
"6.1 Subject to the Force Majeure conditions, the Developer
shall be considered under a condition of default, in the
following events:
(i) Developer fails to provide ready to move in possession of
the Said to the Allotee(s) on or before 20/08/2021. For the
purpose of this Clause, 'ready to move in possession' shall
mean that the Said Flat shall be in a habitable condition
which is complete in all respects and for which Occupancy
Certificate has been issued by the concerned Governmental
Authority;
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 13
(ii) Discontinuance of the Developer's business as a
developer on account of suspension or revocation of his
registration under the provisions of the Act."
"19.1 "Force Majeure" means any event or combination of
events or circumstances beyond the reasonable control of
the Developer which cannot (a) by the exercise of
reasonable diligence, or (b) despite the adoption of
reasonable precaution and/or alternative measures, be
prevented, or caused to be prevented, and which adversely
affects the Developer's ability to perform including but not
limited to the following:
a. act of God i.e. fire, draught, flood, earthquake,
epidemics, natural disasters;
b. explosions or accidents, air crashes, act of terrorism;
c. strikes or look outs, industrial disputes;
d. non-availability of cement, steel or other construction/raw
material due to strikes of manufacturers, suppliers,
transporters or other intermediaries or due to any reason
whatsoever;
e. war and hostilities of war, riots, bandh, act of terrorism or
civil commotion;
f. the promulgation of or amendment in any law, rule or
regulation or the issue of any injunction, court order or
direction from any governmental or statutory authority that
prevents or restricts the Developer from complying with any
or all the terms and conditions as agreed in the Agreement;
or
g. any legislation, order or rule or regulation made or issued
by the Governmental Authority or if any Governmental
Authority refuses, delays, withholds, denies the grant of
necessary approvals/certificates for the Project/Said Flat/
Said Building or if any matters, issues relating to such
approvals, permissions, notices, notifications by the
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 14
Governmental Authority(ies) becomes subject matter of any
suit / writ before a competent court or; for any reason
whatsoever;
h. Any event or circumstances analogous to the foregoing."
19.2 The Developer shall not be held responsible or liable for
not performing any of its obligations or undertakings
provided herein if such performance is prevented due to Force
Majeure conditions.
19.3 In the event, the offer of possession of the Said Flat is
delayed due to Force Majeure, the time period for offering
possession shall stand extended automatically to the extent of
the delay caused under the Force Majeure circumstances. The
Allotee(s) shall not be entitled to any compensation for the
period of such delay. The Allotee(s) agrees and confirms that,
in the event it becomes impossible for the Developer to
implement the Project due to Force Majeure conditions, then
this Agreement and the allotment of the Said Flat hereunder
shall stand terminated and the Developer shall refund to the
Allotee(s) the entire amount received by the Developer from
the allotment within 45 (forty-five) days from that date on
which Developer confirms that it has become impossible for
the Developer to implement the Project. The Developer shall
intimate the Allotee(s) about such termination at least 30
(thirty) days prior to such termination, of the Agreement.
After refund of the money paid by the Allotee(s), the
Allotee(s) agrees that it shall not have any rights, claims etc.
against the Developer and that the Developer shall be released
and discharged from all its obligations and liabilities under
this Agreement."
11. A perusal of the above clauses would show that as per the same,
the possession was to be handed over by the Developer to the allottee
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 15
subject to force majeure circumstances. "Force majeure" has been
specifically defined in Clause 19.1 and the same includes epidemics,
promulgation of any rule, law, regulation, issuance of any Court order or
direction from any governmental or statutory authority that prevents or
restricts the developer from complying with any or all the terms and
conditions as agreed in the agreement. It also includes any event or
circumstance analogous to the specific details given in clause a to g. Further
under clause 19.2, it is also specifically provided that the developer shall not
be held responsible or liable for not performing any of its obligation or
undertaking provided therein, if such performance is prevented due to force
majeure conditions. Further, clause 19.3 provides that in the event the offer
of the possession of said flat is delayed due to force majeure, the time period
for offering possession would stand extended automatically to the extent of
the delay caused under the force majeure circumstances.
12. The said agreement was specifically referred to in the grounds
of appeal filed before the Appellate Tribunal and even most of the clauses,
which have been reproduced hereinabove, were also reproduced in the
grounds of appeal. It is not disputed before this Court that both the parties
are governed by the said agreement and the clauses of the said agreement.
A perusal of the order dated 04.09.2024 passed by the Authority in the case
which is subject matter of RERA Appeal No.92 of 2025 would show that
even in the chart which has been prepared and reproduced in paragraph 2 of
the order, specific reference has been made to clause 5.1 of the agreement
with respect to possession which also contains the fact that the delivery of
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 16
possession would be subject to force majeure circumstances. While
recording the facts of the complaint in paragraph 3(d) in the order, reference
has been made to the averment made by the respondent-allottee to the time
frame mentioned in the buyer's agreement. In paragraph 6, the defence
raised by the present appellant on the basis of the clauses of the agreement
as well as the various orders passed by the National Green Tribunal, the
orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and also the orders passed by
the various authorities have been taken note of. Even the finding of the
Authority has been given after taking into consideration the clauses of the
buyer's agreement. However, a perusal of the orders passed by the Appellate
Tribunal in all the appeals would show that the clauses of the said
agreement, more so the one which have been highlighted before this Court
and also in the grounds of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and are very
material for the determination of the cases, have not been taken into
consideration while passing the final order. There is no finding of the
Appellate Tribunal that the clauses of the said agreement are not binding on
the parties and are not required to be taken into consideration. Thus, this
Court is of the opinion that the Appellate Tribunal, while finally
adjudicating the case, has missed an important issue which would be
required to be taken into consideration before the rights of the parties in the
first appeal filed by the appellant are finally adjudicated.
13. Keeping in view the abovesaid facts and circumstances, this
Court is of the view that all the present appeals deserve to be partly allowed
and the orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal in all the cases deserve to be
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 17
set aside and are accordingly set aside and the Appellate Tribunal is
requested to decide the appeals filed by the present appellants afresh after
taking into consideration the abovesaid clauses of the agreement and all
other aspects.
14. The parties through their counsel/personally would appear
before the Appellate Tribunal on 15.01.2026.
15. It is made clear that this Court has not opined on the merits of
the exact number of days of which the benefit is to be given to the appellant
and it would be open to all the parties to raise all the pleas on the said aspect
as well as on all other aspects before the Appellate Tribunal and the
Appellate Tribunal would decide the appeals afresh independently, in
accordance with law.
16. It would be relevant to note that on 03.07.2025, this Court was
pleased to pass the following order:-
"Present: Mr.Kunal Dawar, Advocate
for the appellant.
***
Notice of motion for 22.09.2025.
The amount of pre-deposit made by the present
appellant before the Ist Appellate Court would be released to the
complainant, if not already released, subject to the decision of the
present appeal and also subject to the complainant furnishing
adequate security for the same.
July 03, 2025"
Similar orders were passed in all the cases.
17. It has been brought to the notice of this Court that the
complainant in all the above said cases have not got the amount released and
RERA-APPL-92-2025 (O&MJ) and other connected cases 18
the same is lying before the Authority at Gurugram. The Authority at
Gurugram is directed to put the said amount in all the cases in a Fixed
Deposit bearing the highest rate of interest and the said amount would not be
released till the time the Appellate Tribunal decides the matter afresh and
would be released after the decision of the Appellate Tribunal, in accordance
with the decision of the Appellate Tribunal.
18. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
December 24th, 2025 (VIKAS BAHL)
Puneet JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes
Whether reportable : Yes
Annexure-A-1
A B C D E F G H
S.No. Appeal No. Case title Project Due Date as per Due date as per RERA Delay as per Construction Ban days Delay if construction Delay if 3months OC Offer of Possession
BBA Order (6 months COVID RERA order (in Due to Court(s) and ban days granted COVID 2 nd Wave is
1st Wave granted) days) GRAP Orders allowed (G0 days)
25.03.2020-24.0G.2020 01.04.2021-30.06.2021
1 92/2025 SIGL Vs. PRAVEEN KUMAR GUPTA MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 418 203 215 125 25.01.2023 15.02.2023
2 100/2025 SIGL Vs. LAXMI NARAIN & ANR. MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
3 101/2025 SIGL Vs. BALBIR SINGH NARWAL MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 420 203 217 127 25.01.2023 17.02.2023
4 102/2025 SIGL Vs. ASAD ALI AND ANR. MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 456 203 253 163 25.01.2023 23.03.2023
5 103/2025 SIGL Vs. RAMPAL SINGH CHAUHAN Signum 37D ( 30.08.2021 02-03-2022 417 203 214 124 25.01.2023 23.02.2023
Commercial of
6 104/2025 STERNAL BUILDCON PVT. LTD. Vs. SERENAS 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 190 170 20 -70 25.03.2022 27.03.2022
RAJESH KUMARI
7 108/2025 SIGL Vs. RENU ARORA MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 456 203 253 163 25.01.2023 23.03.2023
8 110/2025 SIGL Vs. KOMAL MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
9 111/2025 SIGL Vs. PUNIT KHANEJA MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 456 203 253 163 25.01.2023 23.03.2023
10 112/2025 STERNAL BUILDCON PVT. LTD. Vs. SERENAS 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 190 170 20 -70 25.03.2022 27.03.2022
NIHARIKA MUKHERJEE
11 113/2025 SIGL Vs. SUSHILA SANGWAN MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 456 203 253 163 25.01.2023 23.03.2023
12 121/2025 FOREVER BUILDTECH PVT. LTD. Vs. ROSELIA 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 238 203 35 -55 06.05.2022 14.05.2022
NARENDER KUMAR
13 122/2025 SIGL Vs. SHAHANA & ANR. MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 437 203 234 144 25.01.2023 04.03.2023
14 123/2025 SIGL Vs. NIKHIL WALIA AND ANR. MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 404 203 201 111 25.01.2023 01.02.2023
15 124/2025 STERNAL BUILDCON PVT. LTD. Vs. SERENAS 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 190 170 20 -70 25.03.2022 27.03.2022
SAURABH DIXIT
16 125/2025 Forever Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. V. Akhil Jain ROSELIA 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 238 203 35 -55 06.05.2022 14.05.2022
17 128/2025 Sternal Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. V. Ameena Bano SERENAS 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 190 170 20 -70 25.03.2022 27.03.2022
18 129/2025 STERNAL BUILDCON PVT. LTD. Vs. SERENAS 18-05-2021 18-11-2021 190 170 20 -70 25.03.2022 27.03.2022
KAVITA MITTAL
19 135/2025 SIGL vs. Devroop Guha MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
20 153/2025 SIGL vs Shiv Dayal Arora SG Park IV 30-07-2022 NOT GRANTED 186 50 136 46 07.11.2022 01.12.2022
21 197/2025 SIGL vs. Chandra Mohan Upadhay MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
22 198/2025 SIGL vs. Vashisht Arora MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
23 199/2025 SIGL vs. Nitin Jain MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 461 203 258 168 25.01.2023 28.03.2023
24 200/2025 SIGL vs. Gursharan Kaur Chadha MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 430 203 227 137 25.01.2023 27.02.2023
25 201/2025 SIGL vs. Priyank Kumar Sharma and Anr. MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 453 203 250 160 25.01.2023 20.03.2023
26 220/2025 SIGL vs Meena Godhvani MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 426 203 223 133 25.01.2023 23.02.2023
27 221/2025 SIG Homes vs Remzee Williams SG Park II 25-01-2022 25-07-2022 277 47 230 140 22.11.2022 28.02.2023
28 222/2025 SIG Homes vs Neelima SG Park II 31-03-2023 NOT GRANTED 409 104 305 215 29.02.2024 13.03.2024
29 224/2025 SIGL vs Rampal MILLENNIA 21-08-2021 21-02-2022 426 203 223 133 25.01.2023 23.02.2023
No GRAP or NGT construction ban orders passed between 25.03.2020 - 30.06.2021 i.e. period for which extension on account of COVID 1G (1st and 2nd wave) is being sought
PUNEET SACHDEVA Annexure-A-2
Details of Ban on Construction by orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court/ NGT/ Authorities
Sr.
Start Date Stop Date Days Remarks
No.
Haryana State Polluting Control Board vide Notification no. HSPC B/MS/2018/2939 -52 dated 29.10.2018
1. 01.11.2018 10.11.2018 10 closed all construction activities in Delhi and NCR Districts from 01.11.2018 to 10.11.2018 (Annexure A-
3)
Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority vide letter EPCA-R/2018L-113 dated 24.12.2018
2. 24.12.2018 26.12.2018 3
closed all construction activities in Delhi NCR region from 24.12.2018 to 26.12.2018. (Annexure A-4)
a) As per mandate received from Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority vide letter
EPCA-R/2019/L-42 dated 09.10.2019 directions were issued to combat pollution, pursuant to which
Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Gurugram issued direction to Challan / FIR against construction
3. 11.10.2019 14.02.2020 126 activities from 11.10.2019 till 31.12.2019 (Annexure A-5)
b) The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 04.11.2019 passed in WP(Civil)/ 13029/1985 titled as "MC
Mehta vs Union of India" completely banned all construction activities in Delhi NCR and the same was
recalled vide its order dated 14.02.2020. (Annexure A-6 (Colly))
6 months Covid Benefit granted by Ld. Authority, Gurugram in light of notification no. 9/3-2020 dated
4. 25.03.2020 24.09.2020 180 26.05.2020 for projects having completion date on or after 25.03.2020 on account of force majeure
conditions due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic (Annexure A-19)
Ld. Authority Panchkula as per Resolution dated 02.08.2021 granted 3 months extension from
5. 01.04.2021 30.06.2021 90
01.04.2021 to 30.06.2021 due to second wave of COVID as force majeure event. (Annexure A -21).
PUNEET SACHDEVA a) The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 15.11.2021 passed in WP(Civil)/1135/2020 titled as "Aditya
Dubey (Minor) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors." directed Principal Secretaries of State of UP, Punjab,
Haryana and Delhi to attend and make submissions before the Commission for Air Quality Management
6. 16.11.2021 21.11.2021 5 in National Capital region and Adjoining Areas regarding control of Air pollution. (Annexure A-7)
b) Pursuant to which Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR vide F.No. A-110018/01/2021-
CAQM/1461-1486 issued mandate dated 16.11.2021 to ban construction from 16.11.2021 till 21.11.2021.
(Annexure A-8)
a) The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 24.11.2021 in WP(Civil)/1135/2020 titled as "Aditya Dubey
(Minor) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors." re-imposed ban on construction activities in NCR until further
orders. (Annexure A-9)
b) The Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 16.12.2021 in WP(Civil)/1135/2020 titled as "Aditya Dubey
7. 24.11.2021 20.12.2021 26 (Minor) & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors." Observed that the Commission for Air Quality Management in
NCR and Adjoining Areas shall take the decision on construction ban. Pursuant to which on 20.12.2021,
the Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR and Adjoining Areas issued a mandate no. vide
F.No. A-110018/01/2021-CAQM/ 5283-2302 permitting the construction activities to resume with
immediate effect. (Annexure A-10 (Colly))
a) Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR passed order dated 29.10.2022 under Stage -III of GRAP
8. 29.10.2022 14.11.2022 16 (Graded Response Action Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' and stopped all Construction and Demolition
activities. (Annexure A-11)
PUNEET SACHDEVA b) Vide order dated 14.11.2022 revoked the actions under Stage-IV of GRAP (Graded Response Action
Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' after considering improvement in air quality of Delhi. (Annexure A-12)
a) Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR passed order dated 04.12.2022 under Stage -III of GRAP
(Graded Response Action Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' and stopped all Construction and Demolition
9. 04.12.2022 07.12.2022 3 activities. (Annexure A-13)
b) Vide order dated 07.12.2022 revoked the actions under GRAP (Graded Response Action
Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' after considering improvement in air quality of Delhi. (Annexure A-14)
a) Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR passed order dated 30.12.2022 under Stage-III of GRAP
(Graded Response Action Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' and stopped all Construction and Demolition
10. 30.12.2022 04.01.2023 5 activities. (Annexure A-15)
b) Vide order dated 04.01.2023 revoked the actions under of GRAP (Graded Response Action
Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' after considering improvement in air quality of Delhi. (Annexure A-16)
a) Commission for Air Quality Management in NCR passed order dated 06.01.2023 under Stage -III of
GRAP (Graded Response Action Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' and stopped all Construction and
11. 06.01.2023 15.01.2023 9 Demolition activities. (Annexure A-17)
b) Vide order dated 15.01.2023 revoked the actions under Stage-IV of GRAP (Graded Response Action
Plan) - 'Severe Air Quality' after considering improvement in air quality of Delhi. (Annexure A-18)
Total 203 Days
