Inside the Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd. v. Santosh Chauhan Case

In-depth Article Alert! Discover the details of the Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd. v. Santosh Chauhan case, a significant real estate dispute. 🏢🏘️ Follow the legal battle, arguments, and the final verdict. #RealEstateDispute #LegalBattle #CaseStudy

Inside the Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd. v. Santosh Chauhan Case
Inside the Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd. v. Santosh Chauhan Case

In the realm of real estate, disputes between developers and buyers are not uncommon. These disputes often find their way into the judicial system for resolution. One such case is the legal battle between Landmark Apartments Private Limited and Santosh Chauhan, which revolves around a refund claim made by the buyer. This in-depth article will delve into the details of the case, highlighting the arguments put forth by both parties and the subsequent legal proceedings.

Case Background:

Case No.: Appeal No. 260 of 2022 Date of Decision: 08.02.2023

Landmark Apartments Private Limited, represented by Mr. Chetan Dhingra, its authorized representative, filed an appeal against the order dated 15.03.2022 issued by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority. The order, in Complaint No. E/6370/144/2018, directed the appellant to pay Rs.8,71,605/- to Santosh Chauhan, the decree holder.

The Dispute:

In 2018, Santosh Chauhan filed a complaint seeking a refund of Rs.25,11,129/- along with interest. The Authority, in its order dated 14.12.2018, directed the appellant to refund the entire amount with interest at the rate of 10.75% per annum, calculated from the date of each payment until 14.12.2018. The order specified the principal amount and the corresponding interest payable, totaling Rs.25,11,129/- and Rs.17,36,354.27, respectively.

However, the appellant failed to comply with the order within the stipulated 90-day period. Consequently, the respondent filed an execution petition (No. E/6370/144/2018), seeking enforcement of the order.


Appellant's Argument:

The appellant contends that the Authority erred in awarding future interest to the respondent through the impugned order. They argue that the order dated 14.12.2018 only awarded interest until that date and that the executing court cannot award interest beyond the period specified in the decree. The appellant cites various legal precedents to support their argument. Additionally, they claim to have already paid an excess amount of Rs.4,74,570/- and seek its refund. The appellant asserts that the impugned order is flawed and should be set aside.

Respondent's Argument:

The respondent argues that due to the appellant's failure to pay the due amount within the specified 90-day period, the execution petition was filed. They assert that the interest awarded until realization is justified.

After considering the arguments presented by both parties, the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal found that the Authority had exceeded the scope of its decree in the impugned order. The order awarded future interest to the respondent, which contradicted the earlier order that only awarded interest until 14.12.2018. The Tribunal also took note of the appellant's claim regarding the excess payment and the need for its refund.


The Landmark Apartments Private Limited v. Santosh Chauhan case highlights the complexities and challenges faced in real estate disputes. The dispute centered around a refund claim made by the buyer and the subsequent legal proceedings that ensued. The Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal's decision to set aside the impugned order, citing the excessive awarding of future interest, brings clarity to the matter. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of adhering to the terms of a decree and the need for precise legal interpretation in resolving real estate disputes.

Note: The information provided in this article about Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal or professional advice and readers should consult qualified professionals for advice specific to their circumstances. The information provided in this article is based on Appeal No.260 of 2022 before the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority

We hope you found our blog insightful and engaging! We appreciate your time and interest. If you enjoyed reading it, don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter to receive regular updates on our latest content. Visit our website to know more.