A Mohali Plot Allotment Cancelled Over Dues: What Punjab RERA Ordered After The Resale मोहाली में बकाया के चलते रद्द हुआ प्लॉट अलॉटमेंट: दोबारा बिक्री के बाद पंजाब RERA ने क्या आदेश दिया ਮੋਹਾਲੀ ਵਿੱਚ ਬਕਾਏ ਕਾਰਨ ਰੱਦ ਹੋਈ ਪਲਾਟ ਅਲਾਟਮੈਂਟ: ਮੁੜ ਵਿਕਰੀ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਪੰਜਾਬ RERA ਨੇ ਕੀ ਹੁਕਮ ਦਿੱਤਾ

A plot buyer who falls behind on payments often assumes the developer can simply cancel the allotment and move on. A Punjab RERA order on a plot in TDI City, Mohali, as reported by the Hindustan Times on the nineteenth of October twenty twenty-six, suggests that a cancellation has to stand up on its own terms. According to that report, when this one did not, the developer was made to pay for a plot it had already sold to someone else.

According to HT's report of the order, the authority held that TDI Infratech's cancellation of the allotment was not in accordance with law. Because the plot had since gone to a new buyer, it did not hand the plot back. The report says it accepted the developer's own offer of a sum based on the plot's subsequent sale, with interest, after deducting outstanding dues and the interest on them.

The TDI City plot

According to the Hindustan Times, the dispute concerns a residential plot in TDI City, Mohali. The report says the buyer booked it more than two decades ago, and that the developer received most of the agreed price.

HT reports that the allottee expected possession within two years of booking, but that the developer issued a possession letter only about a decade after the booking. The buyer died the following year.

His legal heirs then asked the developer for the approved layout plan and an occupation certificate. They also sought a legally valid possession letter. According to the report, they alleged that the developer did not respond.

What the developer said

TDI's case, as HT reports it, was that it had offered possession and that the allottee had failed to clear outstanding dues despite reminders. It said it cancelled the allotment after issuing reminders and publishing public notices. On the dates given in the report, that cancellation came several years after the possession letter.

The authority also considered the developer's disclosure that it had re-allotted the same plot to a new buyer after the cancellation. According to the complaint, as HT reports it, the new allotment involved a price far above the original consideration.

What the authority held

The authority held that the cancellation was not in accordance with law. The press report does not set out the authority's reasoning. MA tried to obtain the order itself from the Punjab RERA website on the nineteenth of October and could not, so what follows rests on the Hindustan Times account of it.

The report does show how the authority reached its remedy. According to HT, it asked TDI whether it could offer an alternative plot in the same project or a nearby one. The developer said no vacant plot of the same size was available. With the original plot already allotted to a third party, the authority declined to restore the original allotment or to direct TDI to hand over possession.

Instead, HT reports, it accepted the developer's voluntary offer of the amount based on the subsequent sale, with interest from a fixed date. From that total it deducted outstanding dues and the interest on those dues. The developer was directed to pay within a fixed period of receiving the order. According to the report, the amount can be recovered as arrears of land revenue if the developer fails to pay. The authority also directed that a debt recovery certificate be issued after that period.

The law on cancelling an allotment

The central real estate law speaks to cancellation directly. Section eleven of the Real Estate Regulation and Development Act lists the promoter's duties, and its sub-section five says: "The promoter may cancel the allotment only in terms of the agreement for sale".

The proviso to that sub-section gives the buyer a route to challenge. It says the allottee "may approach the Authority for relief, if he is aggrieved by such cancellation and such cancellation is not in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale, unilateral and without any sufficient cause."

The Act puts duties on buyers too. Section nineteen, sub-section six, makes every allottee responsible for payments "in the manner and within the time as specified in the said agreement for sale". Sub-section seven makes the allottee liable to pay interest for any delay in those payments. A buyer who stops paying is in breach of the statute as well as the contract.

What Punjab's model agreement expects

Punjab's model agreement for sale, set out in the state's RERA rules, spells out the developer's side of a default. A buyer is treated as in default after failing to pay a set run of demands "despite having been issued notice". Interest then runs on the unpaid amount.

If the default continues beyond a set period after notice, the form says the promoter shall cancel the allotment and refund the money paid, after deducting the booking amount and the interest owed. Cancellation in this model comes with a refund attached. A developer that cancels and keeps everything is working outside the shape the form describes.

Why the old booking matters

This booking was made long before RERA came into force, so the Punjab model agreement was never signed for it. On HT's account, the authority still examined the cancellation of this old booking and found it not in accordance with law.

The report does not say which part of TDI's process the authority found wanting, and MA cannot say from the press account. The order's own words would settle it, and this piece will not guess at them.

Why the resale shaped the money

The most practical point for buyers is what happened once the cancelled plot was resold. According to HT, the authority did not restore the original allotment. The order also did not determine the independent legal rights of the subsequent allottee.

So the original allottee's heirs are to receive money in place of land. HT reports that the sum was tied to the plot's subsequent sale, an amount the developer itself offered during the proceedings. According to the report, the authority said the settlement rests on the facts of this case and does not establish a precedent for other disputes. It also declined the allottee's request for penalties against the developer.

That leaves an open question for other buyers. The order, as reported, does not say how a claim would be valued if another developer resold a cancelled plot at a higher price. On HT's account, the authority itself said this outcome turns on the facts of this case.

Proof of heirship

One more step stands between the heirs and the money. According to HT, the authority required the legal heirs to submit acceptable proof of their status as successors in interest within a fixed period before claiming the amount. It said a will alone would not suffice without legally establishing the claimant's entitlement.

What a plot buyer can establish

A buyer in a private Mohali colony can establish a good deal from paper. The agreement for sale or allotment letter shows what it says about default and cancellation. The trail of demand letters and notices shows what was actually sent and received, and when. Whether a project is registered with Punjab RERA can be checked on the authority's website.

The order, as reported, also shows the limits. In this case, once the cancelled plot had been re-allotted, the authority did not give it back, and money was the remedy. The authority said the settlement rests on the facts of this case, and other disputes will turn on their own documents.

Related reading

- When an allotted Mohali plot turns out unbuildable: refund or alternative plot
- Builder delayed possession in Mohali: what RERA Punjab awards
- A Mohali RERA order on buyer and allottee status
- When a Mohali builder ignores an order: how enforcement works

Sources: The sources we use are listed on our Editorial Sources page.

This piece reports a Punjab RERA order as described in the Hindustan Times report of the nineteenth of October twenty twenty-six. MA could not obtain the order text itself. Nothing here is legal advice. Any cancellation dispute turns on its own agreement and the notices actually served.