SBI Term Loan: RLLR: 8.15 | 7.25% - 8.45%
Canara Bank: RLLR: 8 | 7.15% - 10%
ICICI Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.5% - 9.65%
Punjab & Sind Bank: RLLR: 7.3 | 7.3% - 10.7%
Bank of Baroda: RLLR: 7.9 | 7.2% - 8.95%
Federal Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.75% - 10%
IndusInd Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.5% - 9.75%
Bank of Maharashtra: RLLR: 8.05 | 7.1% - 9.15%
Yes Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.4% - 10.54%
Karur Vysya Bank: RLLR: 8.8 | 8.5% - 10.65%

DTCP rejects AIPL plea against Oberoi Realty’s Gurugram project

#Law & Policy#India#Haryana#Gurugram
Synopsis

Haryana’s Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) has rejected a representation by Advance India Projects Ltd (AIPL) seeking cancellation of the licence and developer change approvals for Oberoi Realty’s Three Sixty North project in Gurugram. In an order dated August 13, DTCP held that Licence No. 69 of 2025 and the June 2025 approval transferring development rights to Oberoi Realty remain legally valid. The decision follows directions from the Punjab and Haryana High Court to decide AIPL’s representation. With the DTCP order, restrictions on fresh allotments and creation of third-party rights have ceased to operate.

Haryana’s Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP) has rejected a representation filed by Advance India Projects Ltd (AIPL) challenging the development licence and change of developer approval for Oberoi Realty’s Three Sixty North project in Gurugram. 
The decision clears a regulatory hurdle for Oberoi Realty’s first project in Gurugram. In an order dated August 13, 2026, the DTCP concluded that Licence No. 69 of 2025 and the subsequent approval for the change of developer in favour of Oberoi Realty remain legally valid. The authority also rejected AIPL’s request to cancel the licence, the parent licences and the developer-change approval. 
The matter had reached the Punjab and Haryana High Court after AIPL challenged the approvals associated with the project. In July, the court directed the DTCP to examine AIPL’s representation and pass a reasoned order after hearing all relevant stakeholders. 
The court had also temporarily restricted further allotments in the project and the creation of additional third-party rights while the regulatory complaint remained pending. The restriction was imposed in view of the scale of the development and the interests of existing and prospective allottees. 
The DTCP has now completed the hearing process and ruled that the approvals questioned by AIPL do not require action under the applicable Haryana development-control legislation. It specifically found AIPL’s representation seeking cancellation of Licence No. 69 of 2025 and related approvals to be without merit. 
The dispute concerns Three Sixty North, a large residential development located on Golf Course Extension Road in Sector 58, Gurugram. The project represents Oberoi Realty’s entry into the Gurugram residential market and has attracted significant attention since its launch. 
The project’s regulatory history involves development rights associated with land parcels that were previously connected to the IREO Group. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority’s project records show that the relevant land had earlier been covered under licences issued in 2009, 2010 and 2012 before Licence No. 69 of 2025 was granted and the developer was subsequently changed in favour of Oberoi Realty. 
The latest DTCP order has an immediate procedural consequence for the project. According to Oberoi Realty’s disclosure to the stock exchanges, the temporary restriction imposed by the High Court on further allotments and the creation of third-party rights has ceased to be operative following the DTCP’s decision. 
Oberoi Realty had earlier clarified that the High Court’s interim order did not affect sales that had already been concluded and that construction at Three Sixty North had not been stayed. The company had therefore maintained that the proceedings did not have a material adverse impact on its business operations. 
The latest regulatory decision allows the project to proceed without the temporary allotment restrictions that were in place during the pendency of AIPL’s representation. Oberoi Realty has also stated that it will pursue any further legal course of action based on advice from its professional counsel. 
Source- Oberoi Realty regulatory filing with NSE

Discussion

Have something to say? Post your comment