Gurgaon: Punjab and Haryana high court has restrained fresh allotments and the creation of third-party rights in a residential project of Oberoi Realty before Haryana department of town and country planning (DTCP) decides a complaint pertaining to the issue.The dispute relates to a 14.8-acre land parcel in Sector 58, where a residential colony with a commercial component is proposed. Three Sixty North marks Oberoi Realty’s maiden residential project in the city. The project was launched last week. Advance India Projects’ (AIPL) complaint — challenging the validity of a licence — alleges violations of the consolidated FDI policy, the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and other statutory provisions.Meanwhile, in a clarification filed with the BSE and NSE on Wednesday, Oberoi Realty said the HC’s directions were limited to restraining fresh allotments and creation of third-party rights until DTCP decides AIPL’s complaint. The company said the order does not affect sales already concluded, there is no stay on construction of the project, and it does not expect any material adverse impact on its business or operations. Oberoi Realty said it will pursue appropriate legal remedies based on professional legal advice.During the hearing, counsel for AIPL submitted that the project’s estimated value is around Rs 8,000-10,000 crore and that approximately Rs 750 crore was already collected from buyers. The petitioner argued that permitting further allotments before adjudication of the licence dispute could complicate the rights of prospective homebuyers.HC has not expressed any opinion on the merits of these allegations. Third party rights refer to rights and benefits that a contract grants to an entity that is not directly involved in the agreement.Haryana govt informed the court that AIPL’s representation seeking cancellation of the licence under Section 8 of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act remains pending before the director, DTCP, with the matter listed for July 20, 2026. The state assured the bench that all stakeholders would be given an adequate opportunity of hearing before any decision is taken.HC directed the DTCP director to decide the pending representation in accordance with law after hearing all stakeholders, preferably on July 20 or within two weeks thereafter if additional time is required. Until such decision is taken, the bench directed that no fresh allotments be made and no further third-party rights be created. It clarified that the restraint is purely interim in nature.AIPL has sought quashing of licence No 69 of 2025 dated May 12, 2025, as well as the subsequent order dated June 17, 2025, approving the transfer of the development licence. According to the petition, AIPL has also claimed rights arising from an earlier memorandum of understanding relating to the project and sought cancellation of the sale deed executed in favour of Oberoi Realty.The petitioner alleged that the grant and subsequent transfer of the licence violated the provisions of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and breached conditions governing foreign direct investment (FDI). It alleged that foreign investment intended for construction-development activities was used in a manner contrary to the consolidated FDI policy. The bench recorded these as the petitioner’s allegations and expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on their merits.AIPL argued that FDI in such projects is intended for development and construction activities and not for facilitating an exit through the transfer of land, licences, and development rights. Oberoi Realty disputed the allegations, denied any violation of the FDI policy or applicable law, and submitted that any alleged violation, if at all, was compoundable. They submitted that around Rs 500 crore was already invested in the project and argued that halting further development would cause irreparable loss. The respondents also informed the court that nearly 350 units were already allotted.Separately, AIPL informed the court that an FIR was registered in 2024 against IREO and Oberoi Realty in connection with the same land parcel, alleging collusion and cheating. According to the petitioner, proceedings arising from the FIR have been stayed by SC and the matter remains pending.
