Dear Farhan and Fellow Solitaire Buyers,
I hope this message finds you well.
I am Saxena V.M., Chief Executive Officer of India1Stop and a proud business partner of Tata Communications’ GloHeal platform. Our team has been recognized as one of the most proactive and dynamic partners within the Tata ecosystem, praised for our ability to foster meaningful conversations and drive successful deal closures. Here’s what Tata Communications has to say about our work:
> “India1Stop is one of the most proactive and dynamic partners associated with GloHeal, Tata Communications’ healthcare digital solution platform. Mr. Saxena and his team are great conversationalists, motivated businessmen, and solution finders. Their ability to close deals is a great asset to us. Where there is opportunity, Mr. Saxena ensures it is explored thoroughly to increase business potential. We are delighted to have such partners onboard.”
> — *Ramdev Krishnan, Tata Communications*
In addition to my work with Tata Communications, I also consult for leading real estate brands, including Shapoorji Pallonji, Hero Realty, BPTP Ltd., Signature Global, Express Builders, and the Prateek Group, among others.
For the last nine years, I have served as the General Secretary of the *Petroleum, Coal & Banking Executives Welfare Society*. On behalf of our Society members, I had booked 125 flats in Solitarian City. You can learn more about us at [pcb.net.in](http://pcb.net.in).
Unfortunately, the promoters of Solitarian City have repeatedly failed to deliver either interest payments or possession of the flats as promised. Consequently, several buyers, including myself, are preparing to file an application with the *National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)* in Delhi, as the registered offices of both Solitaire Real Infra and Pary Developers are located there.
To provide clarity on the process and its potential, I am sharing the following documents as attachments:
1. **Effectiveness of NCLT**
2. **Key Arguments for Early Settlement in NCLT Proceedings**
3. **Estimated Profit Projections for Solitarian City**
4. A compiled **Excel file containing the contact details of all Kashmiri buyers**.
I encourage you to review these materials and share them with other Kashmiri buyers. If they are interested in joining us in this effort, they are welcome to connect with me so that we can move forward together.
Additionally, I have provided a link to my LinkedIn profile below, which offers more information about my professional background:
[**Saxena V.M. LinkedIn**](https://www.linkedin.com/in/saxena-v-686494138?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=ios_app)
I look forward to hearing from you and working together toward a resolution.
Warm regards,
**Saxena V.M.**
Secretary,
*Petroleum, Coal & Banking Executives Welfare Society*
Visit us at: [pcb.net.in](http://pcb.net.in)
+91 9990623304
**Enclosures**: As Attached
**Effectiveness of NCLT**
Dear Friends,
I am pleased to share details about a recent order obtained by a fellow buyer of Solitaire City, Colonel Dr. Gautam, who is currently serving in the Indian Army.
Colonel Dr. Gautam had previously purchased two flats from two different builders. Due to construction delays, he approached the NCLT (National Company Law Tribunal), which, within Six months not only awarded him compensation but also ensured a revised possession date for his properties, through enclosed part settlement agreements.
Currently, Colonel Dr. Gautam, along with 32 other Solitarian City buyers, has filed a case in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) against delayed possession and interest claims. When he came to know that I am also filing case in NCLT, he called and consented to join with all others & shared his experience as testimony to the efficiency of the settlement process.
As a reference, I am enclosing copies of the orders he received, along with a record of our chat exchange for your kind perusal. However it may be noted that NCLT compromise is only valid for the petitioner’s listed as complainant.
Best regards,
Warmly,
Saxena V M
Secretary,
Petroleum Coal & Banking Executives Welfare Society
Visit us at pcb.net.in
+91 9990623304
Encl: WhatsApp’s Chat with Colonel Dr. Gautam
[15/12, 12:15] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: I was given 12.5 lacs as my assured returns of 5 years and also my unit vide this sec 7 application filed against Grand Venice. And this part settlement agreement clearly states that they will provide possession to me in 9 months failing which ill get 20000 per month
[15/12, 12:16] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: In this part settlement agreement with Supertech i got 10 lacs back as delayed penalty for my studio Appartment booked at Upcountry within 6 months of filing NCLT case..
[15/12, 12:17] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: So what i mean to say is that NCLT has not been filed by me to make any company insolvent.. its only the fear i give to builder of him getting removed from the management of the company he pays me my dues. So finally i have got my dues and also my unit
[15/12, 12:40] General Secretary PCBS: Thanks for sharing same
[15/12, 14:15] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: Yes..
[15/12, 14:15] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: One can file at NCLT also simultaneously
[15/12, 14:16] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: NCLT as such supersedes everything
[15/12, 14:16] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: And date of possession revision by rera for any builder is not related to what is mentioned in our BBA
[15/12, 14:16] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: Our date of possession is final whats mentioned in Bba with builder
[15/12, 14:17] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: The revised date of possession is just to extend his rera registration
[15/12, 14:17] Solitaire Colonel Gautam: Thats all
Subject: Key Arguments for Early Settlement in NCLT Proceedings
Dear Friends,
To facilitate an early settlement and ensure that the builder complies with our terms and conditions in the ongoing NCLT matter, it is imperative that our Appication contains arguments that render the builder and their advocates defenseless. This strategy will benefit all plaintiffs by expediting the resolution.
With this objective, the undersigned has proposed the following arguments, which have been accepted by the law firm and will form part of the Argument:
Point 1 of my Argument
### 1. RERA Restrictions on Extensions
1.1 Section 6 of RERA:
Extensions are limited to one year and granted only under:
– Force Majeure (e.g., war, floods, earthquakes).
– Reasonable Circumstances without builder default.
1.2 Expiry of UP-RERA Registrations:
It is noteworthy that the original UP-RERA registration numbers and their extensions for all Nine towers of Speed & Turbo Phase (as detailed in the attached Excel sheet prepared by Varmaji) have expired. Therefore, no further extensions can be granted under Section 6 of the Act.
1.3 Practical Constraints:
– Pace Phase: Even with a one-year extension, completing **G+22 and G+29 towers is infeasible.
– Speed Phase: With the UP-RERA extension expiring on **March 31, 2025, the timeline is insufficient to complete **S-1 and S-5 (G+29).
– Turbo Phase: Extensions for **T-2, T-3, and T-4 have already expired, leaving no further relief possible.
### 2. Implications of Expired RERA Registrations
2.1 Ineligibility for Project Finance and Home Loans:
Without valid RERA registration, the project becomes ineligible for project financing or home loan approvals, thereby cutting off critical funding sources.
2.2 Prohibition on Sale and Advertising:
Under UP-RERA, a project cannot be sold or advertised without valid registration. This restricts the promoters from attracting new buyers or securing payments from potential customers.
### 3. Conclusion and Proposed Relief
The promoters cannot secure funding, generate sales, or complete construction. It is proposed that the NCLT order the winding up of the project, protecting the Applicant Homebuyers interests. Given these arguments, the defence council will struggle to contest effectively. This course of action will safeguard the interests of all applicant homebuyers and ensure an equitable resolution.
Point 2 of My Argument
As shown in the enclosed Excel sheet prepared by Varmaji, the builder has previously misled the UP-RERA court by providing different possession dates for the same towers. These discrepancies, documented in UP-RERA orders, violate the builder’s legal duty to present accurate information. Such actions may constitute:
1. Misrepresentation: Providing false or misleading information.
2. Concealment of Facts: Withholding or distorting relevant details.
3. Contempt of Court: Interfering with the administration of justice.
The consequences of such actions include:
– Adverse Inference: The court may draw conclusions unfavorable to the builder.
– Penalties: Imposition of fines or initiation of contempt proceedings.
– Loss of Credibility: Erosion of the builder’s reputation and trustworthiness.
Given the builder’s track record of inconsistencies and the documented evidence from UP-RERA, it is imperative to prevent any further opportunity for misleading the court. Therefore, it will be prayed that the NCLT refrains from granting the builder any leniency to present contradictory statements. Since this is a matter of official UP-RERA records, the builder’s defence counsel will have no defence arguments in this regard.
Wishing you all a Happy New Year and looking forward to securing interest on delayed possession and the earliest possible possession date for all.
Best regards,
Saxena
Enclosures:
1. Tower-wise expiry dates of UP-RERA validity timelines.
2. Tower-wise possession dates as per UP-RERA orders
—
Warmly,
Saxena V M,
Secretary,
Indian Petroleum Executive SAS Ltd.
Visit us at IPESAS
*Estimated Profit Projections for Solitarian City*
Dear Friends,
Please note that the primary objective of filing a case in NCLT is to put the Builder in a situation where the Builder would have no other option but to settle the matter with the Home Buyers or else the builders would be admitted to insolvency. Pertinently, any settlement/ compromise done by the builder with the said group of allottees will be placed before NCLT, therefore, the builder would be bound to make good of the same or else Insolvency proceedings will be initiated against the builder.
Even if the builder is admitted to insolvency, Section 12 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Act, 2016 lays down that the process has to be completed within 180 days from the date of admission of the Application. Therefore, within 180 days a resolution plan can be approved and other builder can take over the project and complete it in a time bound manner.
“Because of these guidelines, it appears that Solitaire Real Infra (P) Ltd settled a previous case filed against them in NCLT within approximately four months of the application being filed. Hopefully , we can expect a similar for settlement in our case as well.”
As our project is on a fully paid land and has no project financing, the total net gain after project completion is estimated at ₹958.03 Crores, as per break-up provided below. This amount is sufficient to pay interest to every allottee participating in the NCLT case filing which will be included in the compromise deed done with the Builder. The detailed breakdown is as follows:
*1. FSI and Saleable Area Projections*
– *Total Saleable FSI* = 28,63,354 Sqft (as filed and published on the UP-RERA website), purchased for approximately ₹153 Crores. Thus, the per sqft FSI cost incurred by both builders is ₹535 per sqft.
– As per the latest YIEDA tender, group housing scheme plots were auctioned at a base price of ₹32,000–₹35,000 per square meter. Based on this, the per sqft FSI land cost (including registration) comes to ₹1,100 per sqft.
Therefore, the per sqft FSI gain is calculated as:
₹1,100 – ₹535 = ₹565 per sqft.
– With a balance available FSI of 18,12,742 sqft, the FSI gain in rupee terms amounts to approximately ₹102.41 Crores.
—
*2. Construction Costs*
At current construction rates, the cost per sqft is approximately ₹3,600, including amenities. A category-wise breakup of the costs is as follows:
– *Substructure:* ₹395
– *Superstructure:* ₹1,460
– *Non-Tower Area:* ₹420
– *Finishing:* ₹485
– *MEP (Mechanical, Electrical & Plumbing):* ₹725
– *External Infrastructure:* ₹115
– *Total Construction Cost per sqft:* ₹3,600
This cost includes the construction of the following amenities:
1. 2,043 sq. m. (22,000 sq. ft.) Clubhouse
2. Cricket Pitch
3. Sky Walk
4. Play Area
5. Badminton Courts
6. Swimming Pool
7. Open Green Areas
8. Tennis Court
9. Basketball Court
10. Sky Lounge
11. Amphitheatre
12. Basement Car Parking
It is worth noting that significant components such as the clubhouse, swimming pool, and a large portion of basement parking are already constructed, which may slightly reduce the overall construction cost.
– Construction of the remaining 18,12,742 sqft is estimated to cost ₹652.58 Crores.
*3. Revenue Projections*
As per the allotment letters issued by the builder to Mr. Atul Gupta and Mr. [Other Name], the sale price per sqft (including PLCs) is ₹8,320 on a saleable basis. The total realization from selling 18,12,742 sqft (without considering any further appreciation) is projected at ₹1,508.20 Crores.
Thus, the total revenue from the project can be summarised as:
₹1,508.20 Crores (sale proceeds) + ₹102.41 Crores (FSI gain) = ₹1,610.61 Crores.
—
*4. Net Gain Projections*
The total cost to complete the project is ₹652.58 Crores. Subtracting this from the total revenue:
*Net Gain = ₹1,610.61 Crores – ₹652.58 Crores = ₹958.03 Crores*
Though the consortium of builders developing Solitarian City would not like to loose such high margin of profit, even if they do so, this net gain of ₹958.03 Crores is sufficient to cover the interest payments to all allottees participating in the case filing.
Please further note that the Solitarian City Total FSI has been calculated as published by them in UP-RERA website.
In the counterarguments phase, when both developers submit their respective affidavits, we can obtain the documents detailing flat-wise, tower-wise, and date-wise allotments. These records will assist us in substantiating the following:
1. Identification of flats belonging to our members that have been resold.
2. Identification of flats sold by both builders after the expiry of UP-RERA registration.
Based on this evidence, we will be able to:
– File a Writ Petition against UP-RERA and the two builders before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court.
– Initiate a criminal complaint under Section 156(3) of the CrPC in the Sessions Court.
Additionally, the statements and affidavits submitted by the builders in the NCLT proceedings will strengthen our case, increasing the likelihood of obtaining favorable and expedited orders from the courts. By pursuing this approach, filing in the NCLT will strategically expedite the legal journey toward settlement across multiple forums.
Trust this answers all the queries. However if any are left please call.
Best Regards,
Warmly,
Saxena V M
Secretary,
Petroleum Coal & Banking Executives Welfare Society
Visit us at pcb.net.in
List of Attachments:
1.Supertech order page 1-2
2.Settlement deed Venizia
3.J&K list
4. Cases status tower wise
5. RERA Validity
See annexures in the link
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fhWcsG_d4ozQJaG8fXQ6DMwV5roBRfdT?usp=sharing
