Cour orders probe in case against Gautam Gambhir
Real Estate

Cour orders probe in case against Gautam Gambhir

In a fresh directive, a Delhi court ordered a renewed investigation after overturning the discharge of former cricketer and current Indian cricket team head coach, Gautam Gambhir, alongside other accused, in a case alleging flat buyers were defrauded. Special Judge Vishal Gogne set aside a previous order by a magisterial court, noting that the earlier judgment demonstrated an "inadequate expression of mind" concerning the allegations against Gambhir. Judge Gogne remarked on 29 October that the allegations warranted further scrutiny of Gambhir's involvement.

The case was initially filed against real estate firms Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, H R Infracity Pvt Ltd, U M Architectures and Contractors Ltd, and Gambhir, who served as director and brand ambassador for the companies' joint venture. The judge highlighted that Gambhir was the sole accused to have a "direct interface with the investors" due to his brand ambassador role, but noted the magisterial court’s order had not accounted for his financial transactions with Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, specifically his payment of Rs 6 crore and receipt of Rs 48.5 million from the company.

The chargesheet, Judge Gogne observed, did not clarify whether the payments received by Gambhir had any link to funds from investors. Given that the allegations primarily concerned cheating, both the chargesheet and the prior court order should have examined whether any misappropriated funds were directed to Gambhir.

Additionally, the court noted Gambhir’s extended financial dealings with the company, as he was an additional director from 29 June 2011 to 1 October 2013, which coincided with the period the project was promoted. Although most repayments to him were made after he resigned from the post, the judge found the magisterial court’s findings to be overly broad, combining observations about Gambhir with those regarding other unnamed accused. Consequently, the case was remanded to the magisterial court with instructions to issue a comprehensive fresh order, detailing specific allegations against each accused in relation to the offences and chargesheet evidence.

The accused reportedly promoted a housing project, initially named "Serra Bella" in Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, which was later rebranded as "Pavo Real" in 2013. The prosecution contended that complainants had booked flats, making payments between Rs 6 lakh and Rs 16 lakh after being persuaded by promotional materials. However, no substantial development occurred on the land, which remained undeveloped until 2016. Complainants later discovered that the project was neither constructed according to the advertised plans nor approved by relevant state authorities. Furthermore, they learned the land was under litigation, with a stay order imposed by the Allahabad High Court on its possession since 2003.

In a fresh directive, a Delhi court ordered a renewed investigation after overturning the discharge of former cricketer and current Indian cricket team head coach, Gautam Gambhir, alongside other accused, in a case alleging flat buyers were defrauded. Special Judge Vishal Gogne set aside a previous order by a magisterial court, noting that the earlier judgment demonstrated an inadequate expression of mind concerning the allegations against Gambhir. Judge Gogne remarked on 29 October that the allegations warranted further scrutiny of Gambhir's involvement. The case was initially filed against real estate firms Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, H R Infracity Pvt Ltd, U M Architectures and Contractors Ltd, and Gambhir, who served as director and brand ambassador for the companies' joint venture. The judge highlighted that Gambhir was the sole accused to have a direct interface with the investors due to his brand ambassador role, but noted the magisterial court’s order had not accounted for his financial transactions with Rudra Buildwell Realty Pvt. Ltd, specifically his payment of Rs 6 crore and receipt of Rs 48.5 million from the company. The chargesheet, Judge Gogne observed, did not clarify whether the payments received by Gambhir had any link to funds from investors. Given that the allegations primarily concerned cheating, both the chargesheet and the prior court order should have examined whether any misappropriated funds were directed to Gambhir. Additionally, the court noted Gambhir’s extended financial dealings with the company, as he was an additional director from 29 June 2011 to 1 October 2013, which coincided with the period the project was promoted. Although most repayments to him were made after he resigned from the post, the judge found the magisterial court’s findings to be overly broad, combining observations about Gambhir with those regarding other unnamed accused. Consequently, the case was remanded to the magisterial court with instructions to issue a comprehensive fresh order, detailing specific allegations against each accused in relation to the offences and chargesheet evidence. The accused reportedly promoted a housing project, initially named Serra Bella in Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, which was later rebranded as Pavo Real in 2013. The prosecution contended that complainants had booked flats, making payments between Rs 6 lakh and Rs 16 lakh after being persuaded by promotional materials. However, no substantial development occurred on the land, which remained undeveloped until 2016. Complainants later discovered that the project was neither constructed according to the advertised plans nor approved by relevant state authorities. Furthermore, they learned the land was under litigation, with a stay order imposed by the Allahabad High Court on its possession since 2003.

Next Story
Equipment

Handling concrete better

Efficiently handling the transportation and placement of concrete is essential to help maintain the quality of construction, meet project timelines by minimising downtimes, and reduce costs – by 5 to 15 per cent, according to Sandeep Jain, Director, Arkade Developers. CW explores what the efficient handling of concrete entails.Select wellFirst, a word on choosing the right equipment, such as a mixer with a capacity aligned to the volume required onsite, from Vaibhav Kulkarni, Concrete Expert. “An overly large mixer will increase the idle time (and cost), while one that ..

Next Story
Real Estate

Elevated floors!

Raised access flooring, also called false flooring, is a less common interiors feature than false ceilings, but it has as many uses – if not more.A raised floor is a modular panel installed above the structural floor. The space beneath the raised flooring is typically used to accommodate utilities such as electrical cables, plumbing and HVAC systems. And so, raised flooring is usually associated with buildings with heavy cabling and precise air distribution needs, such as data centres.That said, CW interacted with designers and architects and discovered that false flooring can come in handy ..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

The Variation Challenge

A variation or change in scope clause is defined in construction contracts to take care of situations arising from change in the defined scope of work. Such changes may arise due to factors such as additions or deletions in the scope of work, modifications in the type, grade or specifications of materials, alterations in specifications or drawings, and acts or omissions of other contractors. Further, ineffective planning, inadequate investigations or surveys and requests from the employer or those within the project’s area of influence can contribute to changes in the scope of work. Ext..

Advertisement

Advertisement

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get daily newsletters around different themes from Construction world.

STAY CONNECTED

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Talk to us?