No Proof Of Allotment: Haryana RERA Dismisses Homebuyer’s Complaint Against Vatika Ltd
Pranav B Prem
The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), Gurugram has dismissed a complaint seeking execution of a builder-buyer agreement, allotment of a plot, possession and delayed possession charges in respect of a Vatika project in Sector-88B, Gurugram, after finding that the complainant had not furnished any evidence to establish that a plot was ever allotted in her favour. The order dated 21 November 2025 was passed by Chairperson Arun Kumar.
The complaint was filed by Meenakshi Sharma, through SPA holder Ghanshyam Sharma, alleging that she had booked a 136.76 sq. yd. plot (later offered a 160 sq. yd. plot) in the project ‘Vatika India Next 2’ and paid ₹9.76 lakh as the initial booking amount and an additional ₹5 lakh in December 2022. She relied on an expression of interest reflecting a total sale price of ₹97.64 lakh and a revised expression of interest with reduced price. According to her, despite making payments, the developer never allotted a specific plot number, never issued an allotment letter and never executed the builder-buyer agreement.
The complainant alleged that the developer repeatedly raised demands, sought additional payments, and misled her with false assurances regarding possession. She contended that despite registering the project in December 2022 and receiving approximately 25% of the payment, Vatika Ltd neither executed the builder-buyer agreement nor showed progress on the project. She further alleged financial loss, mental harassment, and unfair trade practice on the part of the builder.
Vatika Ltd opposed the complaint, asserting that the complainant was never allotted any plot and had only submitted an expression of interest, which is merely a preliminary step and not a concluded allotment. The developer submitted that the complainant did not complete the booking formalities, did not select a specific unit, and never came forward for execution of the builder-buyer agreement. It stated that the booking was cancelled on 7 September 2022 for non-payment, and denied receiving any payments in cash as alleged. Vatika argued that the complainant had not produced a single document showing an allotment or receipts for alleged subsequent payments, and was attempting to arm-twist the respondent.
Upon examining the material on record, the Authority found that the complainant had failed to produce any legally acceptable proof of allotment. It held that while the complainant relied on expressions of interest and alleged payments, there was no allotment letter, no identified plot number, and no executed builder-buyer agreement. The Authority also noted that although the complainant claimed to have repeatedly approached the developer to execute the builder-buyer agreement, there was no documentary evidence on record to support this assertion.
Referring to Section 2(d) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the Authority held that a person becomes an allottee only when a plot, apartment or building is allotted, sold or transferred by the promoter. Since the complainant had failed to demonstrate any such allotment, she could not be treated as an allottee, and consequently the questions of possession and delayed possession interest did not arise.
After finding that the complainant had not substantiated her claim of allotment with documentary evidence, the Haryana RERA dismissed the complaint, observing that in the absence of proof of allotment, reliefs relating to execution of the builder-buyer agreement, possession and delayed possession charges were not maintainable under Section 31 of the RERA Act. With this, the complaint as well as pending applications were disposed of.
Cause Title: Meenakshi Sharma Through SPA Ghanshyam Sharma vs. M/s Vatika Ltd
Case No: Complaint No. 3675 of 2023
Coram: Chairperson Arun Kumar
