Back
Solan Consumer Commission Directs Himalayan Dreams Villas To Refund Rs 32 Lakh For Undelivered Cottage
In a resounding order for homebuyers, the has ordered Himalayan Dreams Villas Pvt. Ltd. to refund Rs 32 lakh to a Delhi couple after the developer failed to build their promised cottage. The bench, comprising President D.R. Thakur, Member Vijay Lamba, and Member Neelam Gupta, passed the ruling on , awarding the refund with 9% interest and additional compensation.
A Dream Cottage in the Hills
Ravneet Singh and Sukhmandir Singh, residents of East of Kailash, New Delhi, envisioned a serene retreat in the hills of Himachal Pradesh. In the second half of 2020, their son-in-law, Manbir Singh Grewal, visited Dharampur and was shown around the “EkjapSamridhi” project in Village Anji, Solan district. Impressed by the plan—a 300 square yard plot with a built-up two-bedroom cottage, hall, and kitchen, priced at Rs 60 lakh—the Singhs met with authorised signatory Vicar Walia and the developer’s director in Delhi. The builder assured them that the cottage would be ready by , tailored to their own layout and elevation design.
Promises Made, Not Kept
Between October 2020 and February 2022, the complainants paid a total of Rs 32,00,000 through a series of cheques drawn on HDFC Bank, as documented in the Commission’s records. The booking amount started with Rs 2 lakh and quickly swelled, even as the first wave of COVID-19 and subsequent restrictions slowed activity. Once the pandemic curbs lifted, work on the EkjapSamridhi project never picked up. The complainants alleged that the developer diverted attention to a new project in Goa and even shifted the supervisor, Mr. Shambhu, to that state. Repeated phone calls, meetings, and a formal legal notice failed to spur any construction or a refund, forcing the couple—who had sunk a large part of their retirement corpus—to knock on the consumer forum’s door.
Proceedings and Evidence
The case took a swift turn when Himalayan Dreams Villas Pvt. Ltd. and Vicar Walia, despite being served, chose not to appear . The Commission proceeded , leaving the complainants’ evidence uncontested. Through counsel , the Singhs presented the signed agreement (Annexure P-3), detailed bank statements (Annexure P-2), affidavits, and the ignored legal notice. The bench noted that the agreement bore the opposite party’s signature and that the payments were clearly reflected in the accounts, establishing a clear contract and a breach.
Commission’s Sharp Observations
The Commission minced no words in its findings. It recorded:
“Therefore, it stands proved that complainants paid Rupees 32,00,000/- to opposite parties for construction of cottage at the spot but opposite parties have failed to construct the cottage.”
It further observed that the opposite parties did not rebut the evidence , reinforcing the . The judgment highlighted the mental harassment and financial strain on the retirees, noting that the developer’s broken promises and shifting priorities constituted .
The Verdict: Full Refund and Compensation
Allowing the complaint under , the Commission ordered:
- Refund of Rs 32,00,000 with 9% per annum interest from the date of filing () until actual payment, within 30 days.
- Rs 30,000 for mental tension and harassment.
- Rs 20,000 as litigation costs.
This decision sends a clear signal to real estate developers that collecting hefty sums without delivering on time-bound promises will not go unchecked. For the Singhs, the order closes a chapter of financial and emotional turmoil, while reinforcing the protective shield the Consumer Protection Act offers to homebuyers across the country.
