Yuvraj Singh sends legal notices to real estate firm over 'Inferior Quality Apartment' and Privacy Violations

Former Indian cricketer Yuvraj Singh has issued legal notices to two Delhi-based real estate firms for delayed possession and inferior quality of a promised apartment, as well as for alleged violations of his privacy and intellectual property rights in construction project promotions.

Former Indian cricketer Yuvraj Singh has issued two separate legal notices to Delhi-based real estate firms, citing arbitration clauses over alleged privacy rights violations in construction project promotions and delayed possession of a promised apartment. The legal notices, sent through Rizwan Law Associates, seek "adequate damages for the delay in project completion and the issuance of the Letter of Possession without reasonable cause or timeline extension."

Additionally, the notices demand "delivery of a proper quality, standard, class, and grade apartment to my client, who was promised a premium quality apartment but received an inferior one." According to the notices, Yuvraj booked an apartment in 2020 in Hauz Khas, New Delhi, through a real estate project by Brilliant Etoile Private Limited and Uppal Housing Private Limited.

One notice pertains to the delayed possession of the dwelling unit and is addressed to both companies. The second notice, sent only to Brilliant Etoile Private Limited, concerns the infringement of Yuvraj's privacy rights.

"This dispute principally involves the violation of Intellectual Property Rights concerning Personality Rights and misuse of my client's brand value, contrary to the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated November 24, 2020. My client reserves the right to elaborate in further detail in the Statement of Claim," states the second notice.

The MoU, which required Yuvraj to promote and endorse the project, expired on November 23, 2023. Yuvraj is aggrieved by the continued commercial use of his services, including photographs on billboards, project sites, social media posts, and articles, despite the MoU's expiration. He claims this ongoing use violates his Copyright, Personality Rights, and Right to Publicity, protected under Intellectual Property Rights laws.