Furnish details of money collected: SC tells Amrapali

NEW DELHI: In a bid to ascertain whether there was any “siphoning” of funds, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asked real estate major Amrapali Group to provide details of the money it had collected from the homebuyers and how much it had invested in its housing projects.

The apex court also asked the group to apprise it on whether there was any outstanding amount which was to be paid by the homebuyers to it and how much more fund was required to complete the projects.

A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra and UU Lalit observed that these details were needed so that it could pass an effective order in the matter.

“We want to know if there is siphoning of money and we also want to know if there is liability of the buyers,” the bench said.

Amrapali Group had earlier given the details of its ongoing housing projects, stages of work and the likely time to complete construction.

During the hearing, one of the advocates appearing for the homebuyers referred to the status of some of the projects of the group in Noida and Greater Noida in Uttar Pradesh.

However, the lawyer said there were certain deficiencies in these projects with regard to fire-fighting, lifts, water supply, sewage, power backup, parking, CCTVS and others.

At this, the bench observed, “few facts are still missing. How much money remains to be paid project-wise? Please give a chart. How much money has been invested in projects, how much was collected, how much money is required.”

“Let the builder also submit it. Only then we can pass effective order,” the bench said.

The counsel for the homebuyers told the court that there was a delay of years in handing over the possession of flats to the buyers due to which they have suffered a lot. “We understand your rights,” the bench said.

When the bench asked the group about its roadmap to complete the projects, the counsel said, “the court had asked us to complete tower by tower and project by project. We cannot do it in one go unless cash flow is there”.

However, the counsel for the buyers said there were three categories of projects -- one where people were residing and possession of several units have been handed over, the other was where builder was saying that construction work would be completed within a year and third category was where construction was at a nascent stage.

At the end of the hearing, the bench asked the group if the unsold units in projects, where possession could be handed over, be given to the buyers who have put their money in those projects which has not taken off the ground.the counsel representing the group said they were willing to do this but there were objections from the buyers about the same.