When a RERA Order Is Ignored: HRERA Sends Ansal Director to Civil Prison
Consumer Rights · Real Estate Law
When a RERA Order Is Ignored: HRERA Sends Ansal Director to Civil Prison
By Adv. Amarjeet Singh, Founder, PRAN – Policy Research Action Network Foundation
📋 Case Details
| Matter | Execution proceedings against Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd. |
| Authority | Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA), Panchkula |
| Respondent | Jagath Chandra, Working Director |
| Date of order | 17 August 2026 |
| Execution pending since | 2022 |
| Source | The Tribune, report dated 23 August 2026 |
The Core Issue
The execution proceeding had been pending since 2022. HRERA gave Jagath Chandra a show-cause notice and, taking her age and medical issues into account, granted her multiple opportunities to respond.
She did not appear in person even on the third opportunity, nor did she join by video-conferencing. A cost of ₹5,000 imposed at an earlier hearing also went unpaid, despite the Authority making that payment a condition for the case to proceed further.
Faced with this pattern, HRERA concluded that one more adjournment would serve no purpose. The matter was already four years old.
Why This Order Matters
Most homebuyers think of a RERA case in one stage: file the complaint, win the order. In reality, there is a second, often harder stage — enforcement.
Stage 1: The homebuyer obtains an order — refund, interest, possession, or compensation.
Stage 2: The homebuyer has to make the promoter actually comply.
It is Stage 2 where most frustration lives. The order exists, but the refund doesn't arrive, possession isn't handed over, and the promoter keeps asking for time. This HRERA order shows that when compliance is repeatedly withheld, the Authority is willing to move from notices to coercive action.
It's also important to be precise about what this order is. Civil imprisonment in an execution proceeding is not a criminal conviction. HRERA has directed that, once the decree-holder deposits the prescribed subsistence allowance, an arrest warrant be issued, and that Jagath Chandra undergo three months' civil imprisonment from the date of arrest — unless the company and its directors satisfy the order before the sentence is completed. The purpose is to compel compliance, not to punish a crime.
The Larger Structural Problem
The deeper issue this order exposes is corporate accountability. A homebuyer deals with a company; the RERA order is passed against that company. But a company acts through people, and when compliance is withheld, buyers are often left asking who is actually responsible for making the order real.
HRERA's own project records list Jagath Chandra as a director of Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Ltd. in its Haryana-registered projects. By proceeding against her personally, HRERA has signalled that incorporating a project does not insulate its directors from execution once an order is final.
At the same time, the Authority was careful to note that it must balance the rights of the allottee against those of the promoter — this was not an automatic or punitive step, but one built on a documented pattern of non-appearance and non-payment over several opportunities.
This is precisely the enforcement gap PRAN has flagged in its HRERA Reform 2.0 campaign — the fact that obtaining an order and enforcing an order remain two separate battles for the average homebuyer.
The Ansal case shows what it takes, in practice, to close that gap: four years, multiple hearings, and a coercive order most consumers will never have the resources or persistence to pursue on their own.
Your Rights / What You Can Do
If you have a RERA order that a promoter isn't honouring, don't treat the order itself as the finish line. Consider:
- Filing an execution petition before the same Authority once the compliance period lapses.
- Documenting every instance of non-compliance — missed deadlines, unpaid amounts, non-appearance — in writing.
- Opposing repeated adjournments sought by the promoter where they serve only to delay, not to genuinely respond.
- Seeking recovery as arrears of land revenue where the order permits it.
- Asking for coercive measures, including against responsible directors, where compliance is persistently withheld.
PRAN's Perspective
PRAN believes this order marks a shift in how regulatory authorities are approaching enforcement — from passive record-keeping to active accountability. The ruling reflects three realities homebuyers should keep in mind:
1
An order is a starting point, not a guarantee
Winning a RERA case establishes what you're owed. It does not deliver it. Buyers who stop pursuing their matter after the order is passed often find that "winning" and "receiving" are two very different things.
2
Corporate structure cannot shield accountability
When directors can avoid consequences simply by not appearing, delay becomes a strategy rather than a hardship. Authorities holding directors accountable — carefully, and with due process — closes that gap.
3
Enforcement credibility makes regulation meaningful
A regulator is only as strong as its ability to make its own orders count. Every indefinite adjournment weakens the incentive for every other promoter to comply on time.
Conclusion
This order should not be read as a story about one director facing imprisonment. Its real significance is in the message it sends across the real estate sector: RERA orders are not suggestions, and execution proceedings are not an open-ended courtesy.
For homebuyers, the lesson is just as important — winning the order is only half the job. Enforcing it is the other half, and it deserves the same persistence.
Read PRAN's policy brief and join the campaign for faster HRERA enforcement
HRERA Reform 2.0 – A Consumer Justice Initiative →
For more legal-policy analysis and consumer rights advocacy, visit:
PRAN – Policy Research Action Network Foundation
www.publicrightaction.org
#RERA #HRERA #ConsumerRights #RealEstateLaw #HomebuyerRights #Ansal #AccessToJustice #LegalAwareness #PRAN #ExecutionOfOrders
हिंदी सार
हरियाणा रियल एस्टेट रेगुलेटरी अथॉरिटी (HRERA), पंचकूला ने अंसल प्रॉपर्टीज के डायरेक्टर जगथ चंद्रा को आदेश की बार-बार अवहेलना करने पर तीन महीने की सिविल कैद की सजा सुनाई है। यह मामला 2022 से लंबित था और कई अवसर दिए जाने के बावजूद अनुपालन नहीं हुआ। यह आदेश दिखाता है कि RERA के फैसले केवल कागज़ी नहीं हैं — इन्हें लागू कराना उतना ही ज़रूरी है जितना इन्हें प्राप्त करना। घर खरीदारों के लिए संदेश स्पष्ट है: आदेश जीतने के बाद भी अनुपालन के लिए सतर्क रहें।
