NEGOTIATION PROCESS:

The negotiation process between Mr and Mrs Mittal (consumer) and the Papija developer can be
outlined as follows:

Initial Discussions:

- Both parties presented their opening statements outlining their concerns, expectations, and
desired outcomes.

- Mittals emphasized the impact of substandard construction and the sealing of apartments on
their lives and the lives of other affected homeowners.

- Papija Developer acknowledged the lack of approvals but highlighted their commitment to
resolving the matter amicably.

Developer’s offer to settle:

-Papija developer, upon learning about the case, invited the Mittals to negotiate and offered to
settle the dispute.

-Papija acknowledged the lack of approval from HUDA, clarified their non-commitment to
subsequent plan approval or occupancy Certificate, and proposed compensation of 25 lakhs.

Consumers’ Concerns:

-Mittals, along with approximately 50 other customers, expressed their grievances regarding the
illegal construction, sub-standard materials, and subsequent sealing of the apartment.

- Mittals highlighted their reliance on the developers’ assurances and the absence of NOC and
OC during the injury stage.
Presentation of Confidential Information:

- Papija Developer presented confidential information, acknowledging that they had not applied
for plan approval at the time of the Mittals' inquiry but asserted that this was communicated to
customers accurately.

- Mittals highlighted their discovery of Papija's lack of applications for NOC and OC to HUDA
during the inquiry, expressing concern about the transparency of information.

Compensation Discussion:

- Papija Developer proposed a compensation amount of 25 lacs to assist the Mittals in covering
rent for three months in a nearby vicinity.

- Mittals proposed adjusting the compensation amount against their investment of Rs. 42 lacs for
purchasing a flat in "Sarathya," another residential scheme of the same developer.