SC clears Chintels Paradiso redevelopment in Ggm, residents to vacate by Jan

The Supreme Court has cleared the way for reconstruction of the Chintels Paradiso housing project in Gurugram, directing residents who continue to occupy flats declared unsafe after a roof collapse in 2022 to vacate by January 1, 2027.

With close to 90 residents in the housing towers refusing to vacate, the redevelopment work for the project – nine residential towers with 532 flats – was stalled. Demolition of Towers D, E, F, G and H in Phase-I has already been completed, but work on Towers A, B, C and J in Phase-II remained stalled as around 90 residents refused to vacate.

A structural audit by the Central Building Research Institute (CBRI) had found all structures in the Sector 109 housing project unfit for habitation.

With a settlement now reached between the residents and Chintels India Pvt Ltd (CIPL), a bench of justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe directed occupants to enter into agreements under the terms approved by the court and hand over peaceful possession by January 1, 2027.

“All persons presently occupying flats in the towers declared unsafe are directed to enter into agreements as per the terms of our order, to vacate and hand over peaceful possession of their respective units on or before January 1, 2027, so as to enable the redevelopment process to proceed without any further impediment,” the court said.

The order, passed on September 3 and made public now, made clear that the deadline would not be extended. “No extension of time for vacating the flats will be entertained in future so that the redevelopment process begins as soon as possible,” it said.

It directed that all disputes, grievances or claims related to the redevelopment framework approved by this order shall be filed only before the Supreme Court. It also barred courts or authorities from passing any coercive or restraining order that may affect the implementation of the redevelopment scheme.

The bench appreciated the “unflinching support” of the Haryana government, represented by additional advocate general Alok Sangwan, who played a crucial role in bringing about the settlement between the flat buyers and CIPL.

Under the settlement, CIPL will pay fixed rent for alternate accommodation to eligible homeowners from January 31, 2027, until they receive physical possession of their redeveloped flats. A one-time relocation charge of ₹40,000 will be paid to each homeowner in Towers A, B, C and J. CIPL will also deposit ₹5 crore in an escrow account to secure rental payments.

CIPL is in advanced discussions with M/s Sobha Ltd to undertake the redevelopment. The construction is expected to be completed within 48 months from the date the flats are vacated, subject to statutory approvals.

It was agreed that a one-time relocation charge of ₹40,000 per homeowner of Towers A, B, C and J shall be paid and CIPL was further asked to make a one-time deposit of ₹5 crore in an escrow account to secure the rental payments to homebuyers.

A February 10, 2022, collapse of part of Tower D had killed two residents, and triggered a prolonged dispute over the safety of the project. Residents approached the Supreme Court seeking structural audits and rehabilitation, saying they had invested their life savings in the project.

Of the 532 flat owners, 196 persons opted for the buy-back option offered by CIPL to purchase the flats at ₹6,500 per square foot of the super area along with actual stamp duty, shifting charges and rent for alternate accommodation until the date of full payment.

Another 164 opted for redevelopment by executing agreements with CIPL. About 172 owners did not exercise either option, including around 90 who continued to occupy their flats.

The court has left it open for flat buyers to exercise the buy-back option on mutually agreed terms.

CIPL is in discussions with Sobha Ltd and will be executing the agreement pursuant to the court’s order, the developer had informed the court. Homeowners in Phase-II towers have also agreed in principle to contribute ₹1,000 per sq ft, subject to Sobha undertaking the redevelopment. Besides this, there shall be no additional or hidden financial burden on the existing homeowners, the court clarified.