- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Supreme Court Directs Centre To Submit Unitech Completion Plan; Firm Given 2 Weeks To Give Details To Forensic Auditors
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Supreme Court has directed the central government to come up with a proposal for the completion of stalled residential projects of the fraud-hit developer Unitech Ltd, thus coming to the rescue of 16,000 cheated homebuyers.The court rejected a plea made by Unitech to allow it to complete these projects in the next three years, saying that the government should involve...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Supreme Court has directed the central government to come up with a proposal for the completion of stalled residential projects of the fraud-hit developer Unitech Ltd, thus coming to the rescue of 16,000 cheated homebuyers.
The court rejected a plea made by Unitech to allow it to complete these projects in the next three years, saying that the government should involve a third party like state owned -run construction firm NBCC to complete the apartments.
Earlier, customers who had invested their money to purchase apartments from Unitech had approached the Supreme Court for relief.
The court took a stern view of Unitech’s non-cooperation with forensic auditors and granted two weeks’ time to the company to provide them with all necessary details.
It also directed the forensic auditors to submit their reports in four weeks, posting the matter for further hearing on July 23.
On December 7, 2018, the apex court had directed a forensic audit of Unitech and its sister concerns and subsidiaries by Samir Paranjpe, Partner, Forensic and Investigation Services, Grant Thornton India.
However, the company’s non-cooperation irked the court, which withdrew all facilities given to its promoters, Sanjay Chandra and his brother Ajay Chandra, who are in Tihar jail for allegedly siphoning off homebuyers’ money.
The court had earlier sought the assistance of the Attorney General to examine whether the government could take over the management of Unitech and its subsidiaries to protect the interest of home buyers.