Aims The Tempean Sector 15, Noida

The Allahabad High Court addressed a petition by Aims Sanya Developers regarding the alleged illegal withholding of Rs. 29.60 crores by NOIDA, which the petitioner deposited pursuant to a plot allotment in 2010. NOIDA's counsel argued that the petitioner failed to comply with the allotment terms, and the petitioner had applied to surrender the plot, leading to forfeiture of the deposited amount as per allotment terms.

Around 500 homebuyers in Noida Extension protested against builders for failing to hand over flats ahead of the UP Election, using the hashtag #NohouseNoVote on Twitter.

M/s Aims Max Gardenia Developers Pvt. Ltd. filed a defective appeal challenging an order by the U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) regarding a case with Ashish Jain. The appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance with Section 43(5) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

The TEMPEAN - Phase 1, developed by AIMS SANYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, officially launched on 13-Jun-2016 and expected to complete by 12-Jun-2022. Registered under RERA No. UPRERAPRJ14034.

The TEMPEAN - Phase 1, developed by AIMS SANYA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED, officially launched on 13-Jun-2016 and expected to complete by 12-Jun-2022. Registered under RERA No. UPRERAPRJ14034.

A new Phase, Tower/Building Name: The TEMPEAN - Phase 2, launched under RERA No. UPRERAPRJ14050. It offers OTHER, STUDIO ranging from 180446 to 505031 Square feet with targeted completion by 04-Sep-2023.

The Supreme Court ordered an SIT probe into corruption and the nexus between Noida Authority officials and builders, directing strict action against those involved. The SIT found officials colluded with builders, awarding excessive compensation to farmers.

The National Commission ruled in favor of senior citizens and retired individuals who booked a studio apartment in Imperia Residency, Greater Noida, with the promise of assured monthly rental income, but the developer failed to complete construction, hand over possession, or pay the promised rent. The court recognized the complainants as consumers under the Consumer Protection Act and restored the complaint to the State Commission for adjudication on merits.