UP REAT Orders Probe Into Planning Norm Violations By Greater Noida Authority In Godrej Golf Links Project

The Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (UP REAT) has ordered a government probe into the role of the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority in granting approvals for the Godrej Golf Links township in Greater Noida, holding that apparent violations of the planning scheme “call for inquiry/investigation as per law”.The tribunal directed the Principal Secretary, Housing and Urban Development, to examine whether the Recreational Entertainment Park scheme and building regulations were violated by the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority to benefit the developer, while exercising powers under the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Area Development Act, 1976, read with the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973The order was pssed by Chairman Justice Suneet Kumar and Administrative Member Rameshwar Singh on December 12, 2025, while dismissing six appeals filed by the developer-AR Landcraft LLP challenging a March 7, 2024 order passed by Uttar Pradesh RERA.In the same judgment, the appellate tribunal also upheld a Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) order directing the developer to pay delay interest to homebuyers in the Godrej Crest project, refund compulsory charges collected for club and golf facilities, and rectify defects in registered sub-lease deeds.The dispute arose from the Godrej Crest cluster within the 100 acre Godrej Golf Links township at Sector-27, Greater Noida. Homebuyers had booked villas in 2017–18 under Agreements to Sub-Lease that promised possession by March 1, 2021. When possession was delayed, the allottees approached RERA seeking interest for the delay and raising concerns over misleading contractual terms and additional charges. Before the tribunal, the developer argued that construction was completed in July 2021 and that possession could not be offered earlier because the Greater Noida authority delayed issuing the Occupancy Certificate, which was granted only in July 2024. It contended that the delay was beyond its control and sought to invoke the force majeure clause in the agreement to avoid paying interest. Rejecting this argument, the tribunal held that payment of delay interest under the Real Estate Act is “a positive, unconditional and unambiguous obligation upon the promoter to compensate the allottee for delayed period” The tribunal said this obligation is “unqualified” and operates by law, independent of contractual clauses or administrative convenience.The tribunal clarified that while construction delays caused by force majeure events may justify limited extensions, delays in obtaining statutory approvals such as an Occupancy Certificate cannot deprive buyers of interest, particularly where deficiencies were raised by the authority itself and remained unaddressed for years. The tribunal further observed that the law protects homebuyers not only from defaults by developers but also from lapses by planning authorities, and that buyers cannot be made to bear the consequences of regulatory failures. On facts, the tribunal noted that possession in several cases was handed over only between March and April 2025, nearly four years after the promised date. It held that interest was payable for the entire delay period, excluding only the six-month COVID-19 window already granted by RERA. The tribunal said the developer had “indulged in unfair, fraudulent and deceptive practice, thereby exposing itself for penal consequences under Chapter VIII and Section 7 of Act 2016.” The tribunal held that the developer's conduct “since inception of the project” reflected unfair and fraudulent practices, noting that the actions could not be viewed in isolation. On charges for the Master Club and Golf Course, the tribunal noted that although these were described as the developer's “exclusive property”, the fees were made part of the sale consideration, rendering membership compulsory. It held that this amounted to misrepresentation and unjust enrichment, as possession and execution of conveyance deeds were withheld until such payments were made, and directed a refund of the amounts collected with interest. The tribunal also found serious lapses in the registered tripartite sub-lease deeds, recording that the “exclusive area was willfully and deliberately excluded” despite buyers having paid for it. It noted that plot sizes and lawns promised under the sanctioned plans and agreements were not conveyed, misleading allottees about the extent of land transferred. It further held that the sanctioned layout plan had been “procured by the appellant, was in connivance with the erring officials of GNIDA” and that the project violated the Recreational Entertainment Park scheme. It observed that the irregularities were “incurable” and warranted inquiry. Dismissing all six appeals as “devoid of merit”, the tribunal directed payment of delay interest until possession, refund of Master Club and Golf Course charges with interest, and Rs 50,000 as litigation...

UP REAT Orders Probe Into Planning Norm Violations By Greater Noida Authority In Godrej Golf Links Project

Shivani Ps

Tags