ATHENA INFRASTRUCTURE LTD vs DEEPAK LUTHRA

ARERA URUGRAIV HARYANA I E I'H Complarnt No. s388 of l02l REAL ESTAl'E REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUCRAM 58a8 of2023 02.o7.2025 N{/s Athena Infrast.ucrure Ltd Registered Oflice at M-62 and 63, l'rr'r FLoor.ronnauBhr PldLe \.s Dejhi I t000 t.

Versus 2. l\.{ohiniLuthra R/or Apartment no.

204, Tower,A, lndianbulls Enigma, Sector-110, Gurugram, (ORAMI Shrj Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCEI RahulYadav (Advocatel R.P Luthra (Advocatel I ORDER The present complaint has been filed by the complainant/promoter under Section 31 of the Real Estate [Regularion and Develophent] Acr 2015 (in short, the Act) read with rule 29 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Developmentl Rules, 2017 (in short, the Rutesl for violation ofsection 19(6) oftheActwherein it is inrer alia prescribed that th€ allottee shall be responsible for making the paymenrs in the manner and within the time as specified in the Agreement ForSale.

Complainant *HABERA ,.@- Gunrcnnv ComplaLniNo 5888o1 2021 A.

Unitand proiect related d€taits 2.

The particulars of the project, the details of sate consideration, the amount paid by the complainants, date of proposed handing over the possession and delay period, if any, have been detaited i. ihe folowing Sr.

Lo(rtion olthe projcct Nature oithe project DTCP license no.

3.

4.

5.

Li.ense No.- 213 of 2007 dared 5.09.2007 10 of2011 dated 29.01.2011 64 of 2012 dated 20-06.2012 Registe.ed Vide regist.ation no.

353 of 2017 19.72.2014 (As on page no.41 ofcomplaintl 204, Type'sBHK Pent house duples Tower-A, Floor no-- 20 /27, Patking 03. (As on page no.

41 of complaint) 3893 sq.ft. [Carpet Area] (As on page no.

4 rof complaino "lndiabulls Enigma' Sector I 10,V,llage- Pawata Khus.upur, Gurugran, Haryana. l 2 u HARERtT GURUGRAI\I Duedrteofpossessron Total sale consideration Comt d nrNo 5888or2Ull l0 1?

07.03-2079 [As on page no.55 ofcomplaint) POS. aint) POS.tf,sSI0N APARTMENT Of fHE The Prcnoter sha hondovT the legst possession ol the Apafthent to the Allottee upon execution ond regisLration oJ the sole deed withtn 1g(Etghtcen) mon.hs of cigning ol thls Agteenenr Pronoter sho oller in wntinp the poswssion ol the Apannent to the A ottee[s) upon execution of sate (As on page no.63 ofconplaint) t)7.03_2021 lcalculated 18 months from rbe signing of ag.eement plus six months on account otcovid-191 Rs.4,52,27 ,640 / - (As or page no.59 ofcomplaint) 13 Total amount paid by the Rs.3,23,05,200/- (As per account ledger at page no.

97 ofcomplaintl Subvention till 550 davs Booking amount- Rs.5,00,00 0 /- Within 30 days from booking tl PHARERA & Gunuenav l,; ol Sal" p.ice-* appjrc,bte On approval ofraHl-8o% otsate price + applicable taJ<es On offer of permtssion to use- 100% maintenance securiry + 1000/0 club charges + 100% cost of iDstallation of elecrricity merre, securiry deposjt, energizing Withio 270 days from the dat. of booking-s% of sate price + wltl n 550 days liom the date of booklng-1o% of sale price + (As per payment plan on page no.

74 ofcomplaint) 5t/o 12.02.2079 (As on page Tri-partite Agreement [With Indiabul]s Housing Pi.ance Limiredl ff 0ccupation cenificare 06.04_201a [As pe.

Hrera website) 18.03.2019 [As on page no.

77 otcomplaint) Facts of the comptaint: The complainanr made rhe following submissions in thecomplaint: B, 3. t/ 15 I5 *HARERA # eunuennv Complaint No 5888or Z0Zl I That the complainanr is Company incorporated under thc provisions oi the Companies Ac!

2013 and is engaged ia inter atio the buslness ol real estate development, especjally in the stare oi Ilaryana having goodwill in rhe market.

The complainant has devcloped a residential project n.mely lndr.rbulls Enigma,, in Sector 110, situated at Village pawala Khusrupur Gurusram II That the .espondent approached the complainant and showed their interest to book a residential apartmenr in rhe project and submitted an appl,catjon form no. n form no.4900886 dated 01.11.2018.

The complainant acceding to the request ofthe respondent allotted them a 5llllX- Duplex Pent IIousc bearing no.

A-204 h.rving carperarea of :j893sq.it. on 206/21i l,loor in towerA atong with basemenr parking no.36,37,38 each admeasuring 134.55 sq.tt. in the upper 1jl.

That the total sale considcration of rhe unit is Rs.4,52,27,640 / inchrding BSP, [DC, lDC, PLC, Taxes (GST and Cess o. any other taxes/rees/charges/levies/etcJ.

That apart rrom the total price, the respondent was required to pay rhe Electric,ty Charges, Club membership charges and Llaintenance Securiry deposit. lV.

That the pnyment plan opt.d by the respondcnts for the unit N reproduced herein belowl S,ro. subvenrioarit sso daE a2o1 within 30 dots Jron the dob ol boohns tle$ bookins anount) tY'!.*|': 3 On Approvol fron |BHL 3A%olSol?

Pnce r Apph.oble fores 1AA% Mointunotre s?.untu t 1o0 % Club Chort$ + 1oo% Cost of tnstattodan on alfu at petnfeoh t0 uy 2 HAI?ERA GURUGRAIV li 5% at Sdle Pn.p .Apph.abt? rM V.

Thrt rhe rcspondent ar thc time of booking thc unir, opred fo. ''Subvention Sch.me l,ayment plan,,, and avaited a home loan from Indinbulls Housing I,inance Limited (lHILl to. an amounr of Rs.3,00,00,000/ and a Tripartite Agre.menr was executed on 12.02.20t9_ Vl. 'lhat an Agreement for Sale was executed berwcen the comptainant and the responde.ts and same got regisrered befo.e Sub regjsrrar Kadipurvide Vasika no.8609 dated 07.03.2019.

Vll.

As per the arrangemenr between rhe comptainant and the respondents under the.friparrire Agr.ement, the comptainant had assr'nred th.

Iirbility ro pay ro the tinancer i.e.

IHITL, rhe pre EIt4l interest on the said loan amounftilt 04.04.202 0. .t.he retevanr clause oi th.

Tripa(te Agreement is reproduced below tor the readv wkit s50 Dals lron the doi S% afsole Pn.?.Appt@ble r;; lhe Boftowet hos ntorne{t tHFL ot the :rhpne oJ orrongedenl batween the Botowq oad the Bul.l ,n ktns wh?teol the Bu der hcrebv osuha the hobttt. he hobttt.t an ottount al n@rcst payable b, ie Bottonet lo lHFl tA-tuqd tiobttttytfot o Dr,o.r olU/OS/202| ton the dote al l1t dsbutknent oI toon locitjry ...

ComplaintNo.5880of 2021 VIIL That the complainant in view of the aforesaid arrangement, pajd to IHFL an amount of Rs.3Siz,A44/-as prc-EMt interest agatnst the loan amounttil] 04.0 S.2 02 0.

IX.

Thar as per the Clause 4.1 of rhe Agreement for Sale the complainant permitred the respondents ro use rhe unjr with effect from the date of the execurion of rhe agreement dated 07.03.2019 and subsequent to execurion of rh€ Agreemenr dated 07.03.20t9, the complainant handed over the keys ot unit atong wth other documents to the respondents on 18.03.2019.

It is pertinent to mention here that the respondents have been residing in rhe said unit since 18.03.2019 X.

That furrher as per Clause 4.2 oi the Agreement for Sale, the to pay and discharge all sovernmental dues. respondents agreed tates and other monies, levres. impositions, p.emiums, damaees and/ or penalhes and other ourgoings, whatsoever, payable with rcspect to the proje( ro rhe competent autho ties lrom rhe date ofexecution ottheAgrcement Xl. 'lhat as per Clause 5 of rhe Agreemenr for Sale, rhe comptainant agrecd to handover the legal possessjon of rhe apartmenr to the .espondenrs aarer execurion and registration otthc sate deed wjthin 18 (Iighreen months) tom rhc date ot rhe ag..ement i.e.

07.03.2019 and further to offer possessjon in wrjting ro rhe XII That the complainant vide tetter dared 05.03 2020 ofi€red rhe possession of the unit to the respondents and raised rhe finat demand of Rs.1,51,00,040/- which were due aga,nst tb€ unit WHARERA #,eunuenfu,r ronpla niNo 5888ot2021 However, the respondenrs ignored the said lerter and failed to clear the ourstanding dues to the comptainant ti date.

XIl1.

That the .omplainant has wri$en var,ous tetters to the respondents i.e. o.

10.11.2023, 25 03.2027, 24.A8.2A20, 04_05_2020, 05.03.

20, 05.03.2020 requcsting them ro clear rhc outsranding dues but despire sending repeated reminders, the respondenrs never canre forward to ctear XlV.

That computing trom rhe dare 0S.03.3020 i.e. whcn possession Cum Demand letter was issued to the respondents and as on the date of filing oi the present complaint, an amount of Rs.2 ,12,59,512/- i.e. principal amount plus interest @10.75% is the outsranding amounr which is due :nd payable by rhe respondents towards the unit, and the interes t on the same is continuing ti finalreatisation of rhe sard XV.

That the respondents are in ctear viotation ot section 19(6) of rhe Real Estate (Regulato.y and Developmentl Act 2016 wherein the respondents are required to make the nec€ssary payments againsr the unit since 05_03.2020 atong with interest trom the due date titl actualreal,sation as perse€rion 19[7] ofrhe RealEstare [Regulatory and Developmentl Act 2016.

Reliefsought by the comptainant: The complainant has filed the present compUant for seeking followinp '.

Direct the respondenrs to clear alt rhe ourstanding rowards sale consideration ol the unir along with inrerest at prp5cribed rare w.e.105.03.2020 till finrl reatizarion ..

I *HARERA S-eunuenqr,,r ConDlaintNo.

5888of 2023 D, 6.

On the date ot hearjng, rhe Authority explained to the respondent /promoter about the contraventjoo as aleged to have been committed jn relation to section 11(4)(al oi the Acr to ptead guilty or not to ptead guilty.

Reply by r€spondents: The respondents have conrested the present (omplarnt on rhe iollowrng L That rhe presenr complairr is tjabt. to be dismissed as lhe complainanr has conceated material facts in relarion to rhe subject unitallotted to the respondents_ ll.That rhe present cornptainr js liable to be dismissed as thc respondents had filed an appealbearing no..r,4 flo 1oS/2022 againsr the lndra 8ul1s Finance Ltd. beiore the Honble DRT{tj Delhi wherein the comptainant is atsoarray€d as respondent no. ondent no.

Z and the matter is pending sub-jud ice. lll.

That the complainant has nliserably and wilfully tailed to make payments in time or in accordance with the terms of the Builde.

EuyerAgreement.

1V That the complainant has not fuln ed his obligation and has not even paid th. installments on time thar had fa cn due.

Accordingly, no reliefcan be granted to the complainant whereas the respondent has sufiered a lot fimnciatty due to rhe defaults ofthe comptainant.

V.

That aiter a detailed representation about a group housing project ie., Indiabulls Enigma', Sccror 110, Curugram, Haryana taunched by the conrplainanr, the rcspondents agreed ro visit the site and purchase a "Pent House" on the 20th floor ofA Block ofthe society.

VL That in the monrh of November 2018, the employees of complainant showed a fancy b.ochure which contained a detailed rep.esenration ol lirtings and tixtures otthe flats and a ptan oidevetopment oithe said society.

Thar since respondent no.2 had sotd rh.ir house in Delhi, rhe onty condiuon put forrh was rhat the flat is made ready to move in rwo months, to which the complainanr agreed.

VILThat the said pent house was available under subvention scheme i.e. the complarnant will arrange ibr r partial toan for the said property and wiu pay pre EMI inrerest on behalt of the respondents for t8 months.

The possession ofrhe said flat wilt be delivered within tu. months from the execution ot the Agreement ro Sell and the Sale Deed witl be cxecuted atter 1B monrhs/S50 days from the date ot possession in acco.dance ro the terms and condirions ot the tripartite agreement.

The totatarea ofsaid pent house was 6780 sq. ft. and the price ofthe said flarwas Rs.4.67crores a inclusive.

VIIL That jn rhe month ofNovember 2018 paid a booking amount of Rs.s Lakhs and in the month ofDecember 2018 paid Rs.t7.

3A2/ by cheque and paid Rs.6,90.000/- by cash for which a receipt was IX. pt was IX.

That it was assured hy comptainant rhat thc abovementioned fldr will be ready for possession in rhe month ot January 2019.

That in the monrh Janua.y 2019, the complainant sought documents rrom respondent no.

1 for the approval ot toan by rndia Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. and on 31.01.2019, lndia Bulls Housing Finance Ltd.

Home Loan rssued a sanctioned letter of Rs.3 crore to respondent no.1.

Comnlarnt No.

5888ot202.1 SHARER *HARERI S* eunucnrv conplarnt No.

5888of 2023 X.

That since the flatwas purchased undersubvention scheme, the pre EMI'S interesr lor 18 months/ 550 days was to be pa,d by complainant ro Ind,a Bulls Housing Finance Lrd. from the date oi possession of the said flar.

The respondents hatched criminat conspiracy with acrive connivance with each other aDd on 18.03.2019 the approved loan oi Rs.3 crore was disbursed by lndia Bulls Ilousing finance Lid. to the complainant and the interest EMI s ior 18 months were to be paid by the complainant as per the ternrs ol the agreement.

Since the flat was under Subvention Scheme, no sale deed has been execured between the India Bulls Housing Financc Ltd. and rhe respondeots rill dare, thereby making the prescnt loan unsecured in natur. as no equirable mortgaged or charge was created on thc unir.

Xl That the said flat is not a secured asset of the India Bulls Housing Finance l,td. as no Mortgage Dccd has eve. been signed and .xe.uted bdween rhe respondents and the India BuIs Housing Finance Ltd. that there is no cha.ge on properry in question, thereby mak,ng proceeding under SARFAESI Act does Dot Ue, thereforc making notice underSection- 13 (2) and (4) void ab,initio.

Xll. 'lhat jn the month ofAprjl, promorers inlormed thar the said flat is .eady for possession and since the respondents have sold their p.operty aDd was living in a rented accommodation, agreed to shift to the said flat. said flat.

Upon shifting, it came lo the light that sa,d flar is incomplete and the society and facilities are still underconstruction.

It rs pertinenr to mention that respondenrs were the second occupant of the society.

It was assured by the complainant that all the fitting and flxtures mentioned in the brochure and all the *HARERT *c!b_ eUnUenn14 Cumpiarnt No. s388or 2023 discrepancies will be cured within month.

The respondenrs were allured by rhe complainant to take possessjon olthe said unit jn order to inc.ease occupancyofrhe said property and to scllthe unsold inventory by showinS occupancy.

Xlll That various E-mails were writren to lndia Bulls Housing Finance l.td. and the complainant to complere the said flat as pronrised by thcm l'hat in August 2019, the .espondent no.

1 applied for r pe.sonal loan of Rs.25 Lakhs with lhc ttDFC Bank whereby rhe bank informed hinr that his CIEIL scored is low due to the bounced ti[.lt s of his loan. 'lhe respondenr no. t herein conracted India Butls llousing FinaDce Ltd. stating that the sard pre inrcrest ElVl's were ro be paid by the complainant and they have been illcgally placed in his account, thereby, disrupting hh CIBIL sco.e which will cause problems jn the future ior arranging his finance as agreed in the tripartite ag.eemcDt. xlv.

That the respondents kcpr writins E-mails to the customer carc about the inconrpletion offlats and poor qualiry ofconstruction bur no response was received from the complajnant.

On 12th ol December due to healy ivinds, the entire PVC window of the hving roonr collapsed inside on th. soia ol drawing room, nearly hitring the occupant oi th. flat.

The said incident was reported and a boulder was placed above the w,ndow.

The entire PVC window oi the said flat are stiu weak and could iall anytime due to hea\.y XV.

That on 07.02.2020, the complainant made his first demand towards the outstanding of Rs.85,00,000/ to be paid to the complainant as per asreement. ln the said lette. aid lette., it is mentioned 'we refer to a ffHARERA *@- eunlcnnv letter dared 13.09.2019 .equestjng you to pay the outstanding dues for the provisional booking of the unit jn our residentjat project pertinent to mention thar no demand was made towards the outstanding beiore 07.02.2020 and the dares arc mentioned in the letter are iabricated.

The balance payment was due on 1S.01.2020. therefore, the fi.st demand ior outsranding sives received on 07.02.2020.

The conrents ot the letter dated 07.02.2020 were concocted since the dispute about the incomplere construction had already started.

XV1.

That in the monrh ofFeb 2020, a legatnotice through the counseloi respondent no.

1 was sent ro comptainant describing the detaits of (ructure defaults in the flar and thar 10 monrhs otsubvention has been lvasted since rhe said flat is ,ncomplete.

The complainanr was 'nvited ro rectiry the said defautts in the flat and tiu that rime payments will be kept in abeyance titl the flat is completed and subvention willhave to resrarr.

Xvll.That the complainant had atready received a sum or Rs.3,30,00,000/ trom the respondents and rndia Bulls Housing Finance Ltd. and still the flat was left incomplete.

That on 05.03.2020 another t ivolous, fabricared & concocted letter was sent by the complainant on tndia Bulls Housing Financ€ Ltd.,s letter head demanding Rs.1,51,00,000/- as outstanding.

In the said letter it is stated rhat we a.c ofiering you possession of the flat upon receipt olthis balancc paymenr.

In-tacr rhe possession of incomplete flat had already been handed over,n April, 2019, therefore, making the 1efter concocted.

7. *HARER.

S* eunuennvr ComplarnrNo 5888or2021 Xvlll.

That on 24.06.2020, another lener stating tabricated facts was sent to the respondenrs seeking outstanding.

In all the letters complajnant has fraudulently changed the dates oa subvennon xlX.

That thc responde.ts have filed securitization appeat/appljcation under the SER|'AESI Acr 2002 before thc DRT. e thc DRT.

Delhi in 2022 Copics ol all the relevant documenrs h.rve been tited and placed on record.

Iheir authenticiry is not in dispute.

Llencc, rhe complaint can be decided on the basis of these undjsputed documents and submrssion nrade by the parties Jurisdiction of the authority: 'Ihe Authority obserues that it has terrtorial as welt as subject matrer lurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given E.l Territorial jurisdictio, As per notification no.

1/92/2012-tTCp dated 14.12.2017 issued by 'Iown nnd Country Planning Department, the jurisdicrion of Real Estate Regulatory Authoriiy, Curugram shatl be entire curug.an) District lbr all purpose with offices situated in Curugram.

In the prescnt case, the project in question is stuated within the planning arca ot Curugram district.

Therefore, this authority has complete le rritorial ju risdiction to dcalwrth thc prcsent complaint. [.ll Subje.t ma ttcr jurisdi.tio n Scction 11(41(a) of rhe Acr, 2016 provides that thc promorer shau be rcspons'ble to thc allottees as per agreement for sale.

Section tltal(al is reproduced as hereunde.: section 11(1)(u) E, Cohplarnt No.

5888 ot202l Re rcsponsible fot all obligotions, rcsponsibititis ond functiont under the provisions oIthis Actor the ru|es an.l regtlations ode th.reun.tet ta the allo$ee as pet the ogree ent Jd tak, or to the artuidtion of o ottee, os the case na! be, tilt the conveyance ol a the opotnde ploh ot buildings, os the case noy be, to the ollottee, or the connon oreos to the osciotion ol ollofiee or the conpetenr outhoti\t, os the 9.

So, i. view ofthe provisions ofthe Acr quoted above, the Authonry has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non- compliance ofobligations by rhe allortee.

10.

Further the Authority has no hitch in proceeding with the complaint and to grant a relief of refund in rhe present maner in view of the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in /V€wtech pr?,noters and Developers Privote Ltmttpd Vs Ltmttpd Vs Stoae ol U.p. and Ors, 2021-2022 (1) RCR (Civil), 357 and reiterated in cate ol M/s Sana Reattors P vde Limiaed & other ys Unlon of tnitta & others SLp (Cty ) No, 13005 ol2020 dectu ed on 12,O5,2o22wherein it has been taid down "86.

Fron the schede oJ the Act of which o detoiled rcfercnce hos been nade ond tokins note ol powet of odjudication detjneated \|ith the rcsutatort outh.riE ond odjudrcotins olficer. \'hot fnatt, cuth aut is thot ahhough the Act thdicotes the distin.t eNprclsions like telund, interest , 'penalrJ ond'conpensotion,o coniointreoding ol Sections 13 an.l 19 cleorlt hanifestt that when tt cone! to rcfund of the onouna ahd intercst on the reJund ahouna or directing payneht ol int*est lor deloted delivery of posession, ot p.nalry and inter5t thercon, it is the regulotor! authoritt which hos the po|'er to eronine ond detetnine the oukone of o conpldtnt.

At the sone tine when t cones to a qrestion al seekng the retiel oI od)udgihg canpensation ond intercst thercon Lnder Sections 12,14,1Aond 19, the adiudicating olfcer ex.lusively hos the power to deteminq keepirg in riew the collectite reading oI Section 71 .eod with Secn@ 72 ofthe Act. iI the adjudicotion under secions 12,14,78 and 19 other thon conpenetbn os .nvisosed, il enended to the adjtdkating oficet os proled thot, in otr tiew, moy intend to e\pond the anbit and rope ol the pawes antl lunctions of the *HARERI -db- cunrcnrv PHARER; $-eunuemur o.ljudnating aln.er under s.ction tl and thotwoutd be ogainst the hlndate of the Act 201 6." 11 Hence, jn view ol the authontativc pronouncenrcnr oa rhe Hon,ble Supreme Court jn the cases menrioned above, the Authoriry has the iurisdiction to entertain a complaint seekjng reaund ofthe amount and irterest on thc refund amount.

Ir. findings onthe reliefsought by rhe comptainant F.l Di.ect the respondents to clear all the outstanding towards the sale consideration of the unir along with interest at the prescribed rate we.f05.03. we.f05.03.2020 tilt final r€atization.

12.

1n the present case, the complainant promoter is seeking comptiance of Section l9[6] oftheAcr,2016 and make payment ofthe outstanding dues along with the prescribed rate of interest as provided under section 19(6J of the Act.

S.c.

19(6) ot the Acr is reproduced below for ready .efcrence. ''secrion 19: - Rights ond.tuties olollottees livcr! allotteqwho hasentered into dn agt nentorsal.tatake on upottmenL plot or building os the cose hay be, undet se.tion 13, shall be responnble to moke necesory palnents in the nonner ond withih the tine os speafetl in the \aid ogteehent lar itle dnd thall ?orot the prcper ttJne chd place, the shore al tegisnation charges, nuhnipal tares, woter ohd electncjrr .harges, nointenance chatges,grouhd rcn!:, ond other chorgei if 1il. 'lhc complainant'promoter issued a Provisional t,etter oi Atlotmenr dared 19.12.2018 in favour of the respondents a ortees, rhereby allotting Apartment No.

204, Iype,5BHX penthouse duplex, situated on the 20th/21st floo. ofTower-A, having a carpet area of 3893 sq. ft., under the complainant-promoter's Subvention 5:80:15 for 550 days - A204 Payment Plan".

Pursuant ther.to, an Agreement ior Sale was executed between the parties on 07.03.2019, stipulating rhe totat sate lll l5 14 *HARER,, P" eunrcnnvr ComplarnrNo.

5888or 202l consideration of the apartment at Rs_ 4,52,27,640/ .

Ti date, rhe rcspondents allortees have paid a ,jum of Rs.

3,23.05.2001 to the complainant-promoter.

As per Clause 5 of the Agreement io.

Sale dated 07.03.2019. the complainant-promorer undcrrook to hand over possession ofrhe unir within lLl moDths liom rhc datc of cxecu!ion of rhe said Agreemeit, subject to execuhon and regisrration of rhe Sale Deed.

The respondents-aUorrees opred for a Subvention Scheme paymenr ptan and availed a home loan or Rs.

3,00,00,000/- from rndiabulls Housing Iinance Limired (lUFL).

In this regard, a Tri,partrre Ag.eement was exccuted between the parries on 12.02.2019.

Th. .2019.

Th.

Occupation Ceftilicate for rhe said apartment had already been obtained by the complainant-promorer on 06.04.2019.

Consequently, the possession ol the unir was handed over to rhe respondents_ allottees on 18.03.2019, the apartment being in a readylo-move-in The respondents-allo$ees, in their reply, submtrted that due to the .omplainant promoters iailure to pay the prc !:MI amounts to lndiabuus llousing Fina.ce Ljmited (IHFL) under the Subvenrion Scheme, they received a not,ce under Section 13{21 oi the Sccuritisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement ol Security Inrcrest (SARFAIiSII Acr, 2002.

Subsequently. on 08.04.2022, the respondenrs allottecs were served with a possession notice 'n respectolthe mortgaged property, i.e., rhe subject apartmenr, pursuanr to an order dared 22.03.2022 passed by Sh.

Anil Xaushik, Chiet Judicial I\,lagisrrate, Gurugram, in Case No.

38 of 2022, riied 11 1.) Iu *HARERA S* eLrnrcnnu complaintNo 5888o12023 Asset Care and Reconstfuction Enterprise Limited vs.

Deepok Luthra oncl Another. tlpon perusal of the documents on record and aiter considering the submissions advanced by both plrties, this Aurhorty is of the considered view that, in accordance ivith the ordcr dated 22_03_2022 passed by Sh.

Anil Xaushik, learned Chiet ludiciat Magistrare, Curugram, in Case No.

38 of 20ZZ Utleit Assea Care and Reconstruction Enterprise Limite.t vs.

Deepak Luthra and Another, Mr Chirag Caur.

Advocatc, rlds nppoinred as Receiver with directioDs to take possession of thc subject unit.

Pursuanr ro the said order, the Receiver has taken possession of the unir, with instructions ro hand over the same ro the applicant baDk, namely Indiabu s Housjng Iin.ncc Limrred (tHFL].

In light olthe lact that possession oithe subject unit has atready been tak.n over by the court-appointed Rece,ver, the reliefs sought by rhe complainant-promoter have become infruduous.

Accordingty, the prescnt complaint stands dismissed.

Fil. ssed.

Fil. be consjgned to rhe regisrry llated: 02.07.2025 (Ashok sa Haryana Rdrl Estare Regulatory Autho riry,