Premium demand is holding; documentation and execution now decide Gurgaon downside

Haryana real estate tribunal sets aside RERA’s order cancelling 3 Gurugram units | Hindustan Times

The Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has set aside cancellation of three units in M3M 65th Avenue, Sector 65, Gurugram, after finding that the promoter did not follow the contractually required cure process. The tribunal said allottees were entitled to 90 days to clear dues and at least 30 days’ advance notice before cancellation. The units had received an occupation certificate on September 30, 2021. In the lead appeal, the total sale consideration was ₹3 crore, against ₹1 crore paid. The tribunal directed Manglam Multiplex Pvt Ltd to hand over the units within 90 days, subject to outstanding dues and account settlement. The order overturned HRERA Gurugram’s July 23, 2024 decision and makes clear that possession offers and demand notices do not automatically validate a cancellation.

Why it matters

For a resale or delayed-payment situation, the enforceability of the cancellation clause affects both downside protection and negotiation leverage. Buyers should distinguish a promoter’s contractual remedy from a legally compliant cancellation trail, while sellers must price in the time and documentation needed to preserve an allotment.

Value-Deal Angle

I would focus on ready or near-ready Gurugram units where the buyer can independently reconcile the payment ledger, possession offer and cancellation notices before negotiating. I would treat any disputed allotment as contingent value until the tribunal order, contract notices and current dues are reviewed by counsel.

Advisor Implication

Obtain the complete builder-buyer agreement, every demand and cancellation notice, payment ledger, occupation certificate and any HRERA/HREAT orders; specifically test whether the 90-day cure period and 30-day advance notice were provided.

Source: Hindustan Times

Income tax department survey reveals large-scale property scam in Gurgaon; 25,000 properties linked to fic

An Income Tax department survey in Gurgaon’s Badshahpur tehsil found that the fictitious PAN ABCDEF1234 had been used to register nearly 25,000 properties over the preceding two years. Preliminary findings also indicated another 10,000–12,000 transactions, estimated at ₹15,000 crore, were not reported to the tax department. In total, officials cited more than 35,000 transactions either not reported or carrying incorrect PAN details, with aggregate value estimated above ₹55,000 crore. The survey was still examining registration records when reported, so these figures are investigative estimates rather than final findings against every property. The action highlights deficiencies in high-value immovable-property reporting and follows concerns that state-level SFT filings and corrections were incomplete. For Badshahpur buyers, the immediate issue is not a price signal but whether the transaction trail can be matched cleanly to the seller and property.

Why it matters

Incorrect PAN or missing reporting can create tax, title, source-of-funds and resale-friction risks even when the registered deed appears complete. It also raises the underwriting standard for secondary transactions in Badshahpur: document consistency and seller identity matter as much as quoted price.

Value-Deal Angle

I would consider only fully documented Badshahpur resale opportunities where the seller’s identity, PAN, consideration and registry records reconcile before a token is paid. I would walk away from a discount that depends on cash, altered consideration, an unexplained PAN mismatch or a rushed registration timeline.

Advisor Implication

Ask for the registered sale deed, PAN and identity documents of every transferor, consideration proof, stamp-duty calculation and the property’s registry extract; have a tax professional verify that the reporting trail is consistent before signing.

Source: Economic Times

Top 5 residential markets in India: What’s fueling growth across housing segments?

A CREDAI-LiasesForas report cited by Times of India says homes above ₹2 crore represented 51% of total sales value across India’s top 50 residential markets, while the ₹1–2 crore segment contributed another 27%. In Gurgaon, the report records a 7.70% housing-price CAGR and says demand is particularly strong in the ₹2–10 crore range. It identifies Golf Course Road, Golf Course Extension Road and the Dwarka Expressway as important premium corridors, linking their appeal to corporate employment, improving connectivity and lifestyle demand. This is a wider-NCR comparison signal, not evidence that the report itself changed Gurgaon prices or guarantees future appreciation. For a ₹1.5–20 crore buyer, it supports comparing product depth, employment access and infrastructure delivery rather than treating premium pricing as uniform across corridors.

Why it matters

The figures support a premium-demand underwriting framework, but a market-wide CAGR does not establish the resale depth or fair value of an individual tower. Buyers should test whether a corridor’s premium is supported by occupier demand, usable connectivity, social infrastructure and a sufficiently broad future buyer pool.

Value-Deal Angle

I would compare Golf Course Road, Golf Course Extension Road and Dwarka Expressway on like-for-like delivered area, possession certainty, commute utility and resale liquidity rather than headline launch pricing. I would favour a premium asset only when recent comparable transactions and actual end-user demand justify the corridor premium after ownership costs.

Advisor Implication

Build a corridor comparison sheet using registered or independently verified comparable transactions, delivered versus promised amenities, office-access times at peak hours and current resale listings; separate the report’s market CAGR from the unit’s achievable exit price.

Source: Times of India