RERA rules in favour of DDA as homebuyers of Dwarka luxury housing complex allege substandard construction
Several residents of Golf View Condos complained against alleged uneven flooring, plaster defects, water seepage, hollow tiles, faulty plumbing, inadequate electrical wiring, and incomplete common facilities in the housing complex.
Over 500 flats have been allotted and around 35 families are currently living in the complex. (File photo) Delhi’s real estate watchdog Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) earlier this month ruled in favour of the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) in a case filed by multiple owners of the DDA’s first luxury apartment complex in Dwarka, alleging substandard construction.
Several residents of Golf View Condos complained against alleged uneven flooring, plaster defects, water seepage, hollow tiles, faulty plumbing, inadequate electrical wiring, and incomplete common facilities in the housing complex. They also alleged a delay in the allocation of flats.
In an order passed on February 11 and uploaded recently, RERA dismissed a batch of complaints stating that they “lack sufficient merit and credible substantiation”. It held that the complainants had failed to establish deficiency in service or breach of obligations under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
Golf View Condos boasts 11 towers housing 1,130 luxury flats — 14 penthouses, 170 super high-income group (HIG) flats and 946 HIG flats, overlooking the DDA’s newly constructed 18-hole golf course. The DDA had earlier said that the highest bid during the auctions for the HIG flats went up to Rs 3 crore, up to Rs 4.5 crore for super HIG flats and Rs 5.76 crore for penthouses. Over 500 flats have been allotted and around 35 families are currently living in the complex.
RERA, relying on inspection reports submitted by a DDA-appointed committee and its own inspection team, noted that the identified defects like tile alignment, grouting, plastering, and door fittings were largely finishing-related issues that fall within the scope of routine rectification during the maintenance liability period. It observed that such minor issues do not amount to structural defects or render the flats uninhabitable.
RERA also said that although complainants have enclosed photographs and documentation of alleged defects, they have not provided independent technical assessments or expert reports to validate their claims. The allegations are primarily based on subjective observations and photographic evidence, it noted.
The authority also observed that the project was offered on an “as-is, where-is” basis through e-auction and that prospective buyers had the opportunity to inspect sample flats before bidding. The voluntary participation of allottees in the auction process — in some cases above the base price — indicated acceptance of the project specifications at the time of allotment.
The watchdog also noted that while the DDA may have described the project as “premium” or “luxurious”, such marketing language, though aspirational, does not translate into specific contractual obligations regarding construction standards unless explicitly defined in the agreement for sale.
While dismissing the complaints, however, RERA directed the DDA to honour its five-year defect liability obligation under the RERA Act and rectify any defects at its own cost, brought to its notice within 30 days. It also directed the appointment of a nodal officer, not below the rank of chief engineer, to handle grievances of the allottees.
Share
