Taking serious note of the plight of senior citizen homebuyers who have been struggling for 20 years to get possession of their dream homes despite having paid Rs 1.78 crore, the Supreme Court on Monday froze the bank accounts of Parsvnath Developers and its directors, and issued bailable warrants against the company’s leadership.A Bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said Haryana authorities appeared to be either colluding with the builder or had failed to discharge their statutory duties. “We are satisfied that collectors and local police have either colluded with builders or failed to discharge their responsibility,” the CJI said.The Bench warned that if they failed to appear on the next date, non-bailable Warrants will be issued against them.It restrained the builder from creating any third-party rights or delivering possession to any third parties until further notice.The top court asked the chief secretary of Haryana, the DGP, all district collectors, and police commissioners to ensure strict compliance with these orders and submit affidavits.”These writ petitions highlight the plight of homebuyers who, despite paying the entire sale consideration more than two decades ago, continue to be deprived of the homes promised to them,” the CJI noted.The order came on a petition filed by Rita Tikku, a cancer survivor, and Lokaish Tikku, who invested their life savings in the “Parsvnath Exotica” project in Sector 53, Gurugram. They were allotted residential units in 2006, with a Flat Buyer Agreement signed in early 2007.But despite paying the full sale consideration of Rs 1.78 crore, the possession, originally due in 2013, was never handed over to them as the project remained incomplete.The petitioners approached the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) in 2021, which ordered compensation. However, the builder neither challenged the orders nor complied with them.”Execution proceedings have become an exercise in futility,” the CJI said, adding that even when HRERA issued arrest warrants, they were never executed.The court noted that a bailiff was physically prevented from entering the builder’s premises and the local police failed to provide effective assistance.”Prima facie, we find that these proceedings raise concerns extending well beyond the present petitioners. The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act provides a statutory mechanism to protect the interests of homebuyers. However, these cases reveal that the efficacy of such a mechanism depends on the ability of the law to secure compliance with orders passed,” the top court said.