RAJAN MUGLANI AND NIKUNJ MUGLANI vs VATIKA LIMITED

ffHARERA !$- Gunuennll BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM co R^ltl: conplaintno.9ST of 2024 949 ol 2024 and 996 .r 2n? a tt04.2025 NAITE OF'THE BIJILDF]R VATIKA I,TD, PROIECT NAtll t s.

I CR/qA1/1024 Swaralipi Deb Roy, Adv [complainanrs] Anu.agMishraand Dhananjay jajn, Advocarc 2 cR/949 /2024 Raian Muglani and Nikunl Swaralipi Deb Roy, Adv.

AnLfaS [4ishra and Dhanantay Jain, Advocales L cR/996/2024 si Swa.alipi Deh Roy, Adv Anurag M,shra and DhananJay Jain,Advo.aros I HARERA GURUGRA/ Cohplaint no.987ot2024 949 ot 2024 and 996 at 2oza ORDER 1.

This o.der shalldispose ofaltthe 3 complainrs titted as above f,led beforc thjs authority in Form CRA under secrion 3t of the Reat Estare (Reguiation and DevelopmeDO Act,2016 [hereinarte. refer.cd as,,rhc Act"l rcad wirh rute 28 ot the llaryana Reat Estatc fReAulation .rn.l Developmsntl Rules, 2017 (hereinatrer refcrred as,,the rutcs,,l i.or violation of section 11[4J(a] of rhe Act wherein it is inter atia prescribed that the promoter shal be responsjble tor all its obligations. responsibiliries and functjons to the allortees as p.r rhe agreement tor sale executed inrerse between parties.

2.

The core issues emanaring from them are simitar in narure and rhc complainants in th€ above referred matrers are allottees ofthe proleds, namcly,'TURNINC p0lNT,being devetoped by the same respondcnr pronrorers i.e., [4/s Vahka Lrd.

3'lhe details of rhe complaints, reply ro sratus, unit no, date of agrecmenr, & allotment, due date ofpossession, offer of possession and retieisought aregiven in the rabte below: Proiert Nameand Location 'Turnrng Pornl', Sector.

BSB, Vr taee Iatsanr, AffordablcCroup ltousins 25 t0 2011 15.03,2025 area- 93588.71sq. mrs.

Vrde reB srrrLon no.

2t l ts Q9 201?

HARERA GURUGRAII Complaint no.9A7of 2024 949 ol 2424 and 996 ol 2024 A) khedun -tt ws*s'i- i r..,.is'a APonnent subjed t. tinely pot nt ol onoun5 d!. by the All.nee k the Prcnorer os pet ogreetl polnent plo. lnent plo./$hedule, os giv nkheduleDol the Agftenena the Ptunatet ogrce, antl udeRtonds thot tinelr delieery oJ po$e$ion of the Aporth.nt olong with po&iN ro the A otue(s) ond the connor oreos ta the a$ocionon oJ Allo ee\ ot the Conpetent outhontf, dt the cose noy be, ot provided und?t ru|e 2(1)lll oJ Rules,2017, E the esen.e ol thp "The pronoter ossutes to hond ovet poseston .l the Apotuntent olong '|th porking os pet ogreed tems ond.anditions unles there isdelo! due n) ^[orc aajeuft" couft d.de6, 6ownn.ht pohc!/ suidelin s, dechions ollecting the resutot develapnent oJ th. rcot e*ore prot.rt 4 the .onpletian af the Pruiat it deloyed dle to the obove .ondttiont, then rhe Allo$ee ogrees rhot the Prcdot t shol be eltiled to the etensian af tine lot detivery of poswion olApottnent". ic- cR/9A9/2024 0104.2024 01 04 2027 01.04 2024 05 a7 2Q24 05 0?

2024 21,03 2011 31.01.2017 27 A3 2a17 24.t2.20t4 [Page 32 ol 1?.r2 201A 24.71.2017 IPase 36 605, 6b floor, HSC O26.WEST END 7 405, WEST END 7 936.89 sq. ft.

505,5d,loor in HS 026 WEST END HARERA GURUGRAN/ Complaint no 9a7 oi2024 999 .t 2ll14 and 996 nf 2n?4 211it62022 11.06.2022 '=A.n:;,1/- .

24.05.2021 -r66,s3r3sr- 16633,s3s/- 112,82655/ 11214,220/.

N,n 6rr.;d- - 4.

The facts ofallthe complaints filed by the complainant/ allottee are also similar.

Out ol the above-mentioned cases, the particulars ol lead case CR/987/2024 titled as Bhoplndet Singh Tony and Amit Tony V/s yat*o r,td. are beingtaken into consideration for determining the rights olthe allottees qua refund oftheamount paid by the complainants along with interest and compensation.

A.

Unltand prorect related details 5.

The particulars ofunit details, sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainants, date of proposed handing over the possession, date of buyer's agreementetq have been detailed in the following tabular form: HARERA GURUGRAl\/ Complaint no 987 of2024 989 ol 2024 and 996 of 2024 CR/9A?/2024 titted as BhopinderSinsh lon!ond AmitTon! v/s vatika Lt. vatika Lt.l I vatika Turning Point, SectoFESB, Gurugram, 2 3 DTCP License no and 9r of20r3 dared 2610,2013 5 RERA Registered/ not Vide re8rtranon no 213 ol 2017 datod 15.09.2017 Resist€red a.ca- 93583 71 sq nrtrs.

605,6,i floor, HSC'026'wESTEND 7 936 89 sq, ft.

21.03.20L?

Date of BBA/Ag.eement fo!

28.t2.20t4 ClnsLructron Lrnked P dd 7.1 A) schedule lq potsetsion ol the sotd Apofthent Subject to tioelt porneht al onounts due b! the Allortee to the Pronoter os pet ogreed poyment pton/schedule, os stven tn Schetlule D oI the agreenena the Ptonotct ogrees ond undestonds thot tihely delivery ol possesioh ol the Apartnenr olong with potkins to rhe Allottee(s) ond the cann.n oreos to the oseciaaon ol Allott*s or the Conpetent outharity, os the cas. no! be, os pravided un de t ru te 2 ( 1 ) (i ol Ru let 2 0 1 7, i s Lhe esence at the Alreenent.

HARERA GURUGRAN,I complaint no 987 of2o24 939 of2024 and 996 of2024 "l he prcnotet ossttes to hond oter Possession ol Lhe Apattnent olong with porkthg os pet ogreed tetds ahd condittons unl6s thete ts detoy dre to "force hoieure". cou.t ordert Covqnnent polkt/ gut.Jelines, decisions alfectihs the resutot devetopdent olthe teat estate prcject u the conptetion ol the Proiect 6 deloted due ra theobovecohdnions,then the Allottee osl.es thot the Prcnoter sholl be ennded to the extension ol une lor detjverr ol posesion olAPonnenL" t2 24.06.2022 {Fo uneltrfra.tructurea..lOrivs Trevor D',Ltma and ofr, (12.03.2018 sc); MANU/SC/0253/20r8- rlon'ble Apcx Cou obsewed that^a petson .annot b. made to wait indelinitely for the possession of th€ ilats allott€d tothem and they are entitled to scok the refu.d ofthe amount paid by them, alonS with .ompensation.

Ahhough we areaware o, the lact thatwhen the.e was no de|very p€riod stipulated in the agreement, a reasonable tine has to be taken irto consideration, ln the lacts and circumsia.L.s of this case, a time pe.iod of 3 years would have been reasonabl€ for completion of the contEct. e contEct.

Funher, an additronal extension ol6 months provided to the dcveloper in view ol HAREM Notillcation no.9/3.2020 in lieu ot Covid'191 ln vjewof !heabove-mennon€d.easonins, the due date for handing over the possession of rh. trniL..mes our ro be 28.06,2022.

Totsl sale.onside.anon Rs.66,33,535/. lAs D€r BBAat Daqe 34 o{complarntl Amount paid by th€ Rs.12,79,000/ l4s qtLe€!! q!-P?r9?l!!!9! occupation ccrtificate *HARER S- (,URUGRA[/ Complarnt no 987 of2024 989 0f 2024 and 996 at 2424 Facts ofthecomplaint The complainants have made the following submissions jn the complain t: a.

That on the basis of oral representations oi the respondent, the complainants, booked a 3 BHK .esidential apartment with one parking, fortheirown personaluse, r:e., flat no.

HSG-026 WEST END 7-605, 6,h Floor ddmeosuring 1445 sq. /r super area in the 'Croup Housing Project', namely'Vatika Turning Point', located at Sector- 88B, Gurugram, Haryana.

The Respondent Company vide letter dated 21.03-2017 agreed that the Basi. $1€ price of the flat would be Rs.4,100/-per sq.lt. ofsuper area amounting to a totalcost of Rs.

66,33,535/- and in lieu ofthe asreed terms, the complainants paid a total sum olRs.

12,79,0001- unn|2A.09.2077 as2\o/o ofthe cost of lr. rhe roralcost offlat.

0n assurance ofthe respondentthatthe construction work wrllstart soon, the complainants and th. respondent entered and execulctl upon a Builder Buyer Agreement on 27.12 201U.

As per clausc rro 7.1 ol the BBA, the possess,on of the said flat shall b. as per rh. ag.eed terms and conditions in the Application Fo.m issued on 21-03-2017 i.e., within a period of 48 months lrom the date oi execution ofthe Builder BuyerAgreementunless there is a delay dLrc to'force nojeure'.Ihe rcspondent company however kept assu ng the complainants that the construction would start shortly, and thc prolect would be completcd very soon 'lhe possession ol thc s!id nrt was duc on 27.12.2022. c.

2.2022. c.

The project is duly registered wllh the HREM registration number RIRA CRc-502-2019 lPreviously registered vide Registration No B.

6.

HARERA GURUGRA[/ Complaint no.987.f 2024 949 of2024 a.d 996 of2024 213/2017 of doted 15.09.2012 as per the agreement issued to tha allottee/ complainant(s).

Now it has come to the notice of the complainants, that the respondent unconditionaUy admitted belorc this Hon'ble Authority that it has abandoned the project and has appl,ed for deregistration of the same project from the counsel statement recorded in order dated 10.01.2024 in CRl3473/2023 case titled as Aditya Tyagi and Geet Tyagi Vs.

Vatika Ltd.

Since it is now admitted position by the respondent that it has abandoned th€ project and being in default of handing over the possession until today, the respondent be directed to pay the entire amount of Rs.

28,30,492/- [i.e., Actual amount paid & interest calculated @ 180,6 p.a.l.

Reli€f sought by the complainants: The complainants have sought the following relie(s): a.

Direct the respondentto refund the entrreamount ofRs.28,30,492l paid bythe complainants alongwith interest @ 180,6po., calculatod lrom the date of first payment u ntil the date ofactualrefund- b.

To award the Wndent lite interest on the amount paid by lhe complainants from till the date of order passed bythis Ld.

Authority. c.

To award a compensation of Rs.

5,00,000/- for undue hardships, mental and physicalagony and t€nsion to th€ complainants due to non'delivery ofpossession otthe flat by the respondent. d.

To award the cost of the complaint to the complainants. e.

To provide anyother relief that may be deemed fitand proper inthe factsand circumstances ofthe present case.

C, 7.

8. on the date of hearing, the authority explained to the respondent /promoters aboutthe contraventions as alleged to have been committ€d in relation to section 11(4) (a) ofthe Act to plead gu,lty or not to plead guilty.

D.

Reply by the respondent 9. pondent 9.

The respondent has contested the complaint on the following grounds: *HARER* !is- crnricnrvr Complaint no 987 o12024 9AS.f 2024 rnd 99ri.f2024 a.

Thatthe"TurningPoint"isar€sidential g.ouphousingprolectbcrng developed by the respondent on thc licens.d land admeasunng 18 80 acres situated at Sector 888, Gurug.am.

Lrcense No.9l of20l3 forthe'TurningPointProject"hasbeenobtainedon26 10.2013by respondent and the construction was started in terms thereof b.

Irurther, after establishment ofthe Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority the respondent applied ior registration ol its project "'lurn,ng Points" and the authority registered the said protect vidc its RcgistratioD No.

213 of 2017 dated 15.09.2017.

Desp!te thc challenges on account ofhuge def,ault by buyers and dcmonetlzanon affectjng the developmenl ofthe proiect, the construction of'lu.nrng Po int p roject was undertaken bythercspondent rn nghtearnestand the same proceeded in full swing. ..

That the complainants had book€d residential unit bearing no.HS0' 026-WestInd 7 605havingarcaolll45sq. ft.videAgreemcntLo salc dated 28.12.2018.

As per clause 7 ot the Agreement to Salc dated €xecuted with the complainants, the construction ol th. project was contemplatcd to be completed subtect to lorce majeunl circumstances mentioned in clause 9 thereol which provided for extension oftime. lt is further submitted that the present complarnt GURUGRA[/ HARERA 1l is pre-mature as,t is the admitted position ofthe compla,nants that tbe respondent is required to handover the possession ot the said unit in 48 months from the date of executio. of the builder buvcr agreFmenl. 'lhprelorp.

Iil.nB r prc.mdrLr" 'omtldrnr \ r,r mainta'nable at all the same mustbe dismissed on the said ground.

That it is the admitted position that the complainant has only madc payment towards the bookrng of the said unrt whrch rs around 10,lll of the total sale consideration only. tion only.'lhus, the complainant hls defaulted in makjng the payment as pcr thc ternrs ol thc sard Agreement and therefo.e such irivolous complaint must bc dismissed on the said ground itself.

Most of the flat buyers including the complainants have wilfully defaulted in thc payment schedulc which has also contributed to the delay in the construction actrvir) and affectingthe completion ofthe project.

That iactorswhich materiallyand adversely affected the proiect.rre being setout herein under: 1.

Nobncation No.

L.A.C. (Gl'N -T-LA./2014/3A50 dated 24.12.2014 to acquire land in sectors 88A,888,894,89B,954,958 &ampre9A for purpose DfconstrDct and dcvclop seclor roads publishcd iD newspaper Dainik,aBran on 30.12.2014.

Award No.56 on dated 23.12.2015 passed by the Lrnd Acquisition Collector Sh.

Kulbir Singh Dbaka, Urban Estarcs, GurDgram, Haryana for purpose ofdevelopment and utilization of land for sedor roads iD sectors 884,888,89A,898,954,958 2. fl mportant Note W. have aot license no.91 on 2 6.10.2013 bu t till 23.12,2016 tand was not acquired by the authority/Govt tor purposes oldevelopme.r &.mpi ulilization ofs.ctor roads, Dchy for rhe a.quning process was 3 years rwo fronthsl Delay in paynents by malority of thc buyeB of the said 8up L HARERA GURUGRA[/ complainr no 987 of2024 949 al 2424 ard 996 ni 2024 Demonetization of curren.y notes having afiect of pa.e oI The Road constructjonand development works jn Curu8.am ar. maintained by the HUDA/CMDA but the NHAI has plan th. development ol Curue.am Pataudi'Rcwari Ro.d, NH 352 W The notification was publjshed by the Minisrry ofRoad Transporr & Highways in Gazette of lndia on 25.07.201a that the marn 60 [.{tr.

Road (NH 352 W) near Harsaru Village shall deve]op & .onsrru.t bv rhe NHAJ The GMDA has approa.hed the Administrator, HSVP, CuruBram and request to directHSVP/l,AO to hand ove.encumbrance r.cc possession of laDd from Dwarka Dxpressway r.. iunctioi or 884/888 to wazirpurChowk to GMDA so that possession ofland unde. land unde.

Bhara!!ala Pariyojana on 11.07.2018 may be handover ro NHAIoD 08.09.2020. anou,]t ol&. zga!!!q:r r44r s!DIc! situatedinvillase-Hars3ru,SectoFSSB,GuruBram,Haryana 17.08.2021 & forfeitr!!gsq!!!rylEqqf Is: !9r01,0Q01 Vatika Limited has filed an another application on 16.04 2021 lor misration oi18.8oAoesof exhtjnBe.oup housingcolonybeannS license no.91 of 2013 to settjng up mix use under (ToD) poli.y The DTCP publisbed a notification no.

CCP/TO0/2016/34:j on 09.02.2076 lot erecting translt orient.d developmenr (lODl policy.

Vatika Limited has filcd a. application tor approvil or revised building plan under (TOD) policy 05.09.2017 and panl Vatika Limited has madea request for withdrawal of applicrt ioi for grant ol license for mix land use under (TOD) poli.y oi 03.03.2022 due to change in plannin8.

Thc DTCP has acceprcd a request tor withdrawal of appli.anon under (ToDl Policy on Vatika Limited has filed an application to Chret Adminisralor, HUDA, Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana to grant award in favor ot Vatika Limited toconstruct sectorroads in sedor aaA, 8aB, 89A lbr Dwarka ExDresswav & Nll:152W Re routing ofhigh-tcnsion wires lines passing throuEh thc la lds resuhinsin inevitable change in layoutplans.

Environment Pollution Conrrol Authoriry regardi ollution ! !!!ol 4ulltrzrity fesardins ban on Various orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, NCT.

No motorable acccss to sitc.s the 26acre the project was taken on lease by L&T, the HARERA GIJRUGRA[/ .onstrucaon activities every ycar lor a pe.rod of 50 75 day\ the best months for.onstru.rion Due to outbreak of Covid 19 pandemrc, rhere was a complet. lockdown on two instances, 1.

In 2020 COI neady io.6 monrhs which was extended for anothcr 3 months.

In 2021, for two months at the outbreak ofDeha Virui Delay in supply ofcement & steeldue to various agitations and covid-papdamic 2019 1',i.

10.

Rejoinder rorthepurposeofg.ound state government on s Declaration of Curgaon as notifi ed area water & rest. er & rest.ictions imposed by the etlrtrrtiotri! r.n.rLrLi,,r , ,.,\ \ ,rr I I f.

That due to the said loss suffer€d by the respondent in the said project. the respondenthad no otheroption butto appty for de-regjstrarion ofthe said project.

The inEnrion ofthe respondent is bonafide and the above said proposal for de-registrahon ofthe project is filed in the interest ot the allottees of the project as the project could not be delivered due to reasons beyond thecontrol of the respondenr. filed by the complainants is also taken on record and considered bythe authoritywhile adjudicaring upon rhe reliefsought by the complainants.

Copies ofall the relevanr documents have been filed and placed on the record.'lheir authcnricity is noi in dispure.

Hence, rhr complaint can be decided on the basis of rhos. undisputed documenrs and submissions made by the partres.

E. lurisdiction ofth€ authority 11.

The authority obserues that it has terrirorial as well as subject matter jurisdiction io adjudicate the present complaint lor the reasons givef [.I Territorial iu sdiction t2.

As per nohfr(atron 7 I ICP dated I4.r2.20r7 issued by Tnhr rnd Countrv PIJnnrng l.,eparlmenr.

Haryana. thF jun\drflror at no. t/e2/201 HARER GURUGRA[/ Haryana Real Estate R€gulatory Authority, curugram shall be enrLrc Gurugram district for all purposes.

1n rhe present case, the projecr in questioD is situated within the planning a.ea ol Curugram disrricl.

Therefore, this authority has complete territorial iurisdictron todeal wi0r the prcs.nt complaint.

E.

II Subiect.matter iurisdiction 13.

Sectjon 11(41 (a) olthe Act,20l6 provides thar rhe promoter shal bc responsible to the allottees as per agreement for sale.

Secrion 11(a) (al rs reproduced as hereunder: ''section 11(1) (o) Re rcsponeble lat ollabligoton' .esponebilnjes ahd lunctbns mdet the pravitonsolth6Actorthe rules and rcguldrions nade the.emderor to the ollattees as pet the ogreenent lor sah, ot to the o$odotrcn alollotc6, ot t he Luse na! be, till the. till the.anvelunrc of all the opartnenL!, ploLs or butldno\, osthe.asc no! be,tothe ollattees,o.the contnon oteos Lothe ossadatbn olallauees or the canpetentourhanty, as thc.ase nat be Section 31-Fuctions oJ the Authority: 3aA b ensure cohplionce al the obligo|ians can upon the pronnte$, Lhe ollattees and the teal estote agehLt un1let th6 Act ond the .u|.s and tcg u lo tian s nad e therc u nd e r" 14.

F-urther, the authority has no hitch in proceeding with the complajnr and to grant a relief olreiund in the present marter in view of rhe iudgemenr passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in ,ryentecl, Promoters on{!

Developers Privatc Limited vs Su,te ol U.p. and ors. (Civil Appcal o 6745-6749 o12027) and reiterated in case of M/s Sa na Reoltors Privote Limited & other Vs Union oJ Indio & others SLP (Civil) No.

13005 oJ 2020 decided on 12.05.2022 lvherein it has been la,d down as under: "86 frcn theyhehe of the A.tolwhich o detoiletl refe.en.e has beo) nude ond toking note ol po\|e. of adtudkotiad delnaukd wtth thc .esutatary outhorny and adjudnotns olfics.||hoL llnuty tuth out ts that olthough the Act indicotes the djtlnct e,prcsiont hke tet'und, ntetest ,'penally'ona hnpenraran , a .antant rcodng ofsecti.n\ 13 and 19 deatt! nanletts that when t dnhe\ Lo rcJund al the onau , Complaintno.9ST of 2024 989 ol 2024 and 996 ol 2A24 * HARER,C -&- crnrcnnl,l 15 t,. dnA intur*t on the refLnd an.LnL ot dire.ting pothentafihtetestlor delaled dehvery alpose$tan, at penokt and tntercsltheteon, n 6 he regulatorr outhanly||htch has the powet to exontn. ond deternihe the autcone ol o conploinL At the sohe tine, when n .anes to o quatian olseekihg the reliefafa.ljudgtng Lanpensottan ond tntercn thercon uhdet 9.ttans 12, 14, ta ond 19, the adjudnoting ollict e\tlLtivety hos the powet to.leternne keepns tn vrcw rhe c.lle.ttec ttodins ofSectton 71.eaA wtth Sec on 72 althcAct iftheodjudiation under Sectlans 12,14,lAonA 19 other thon canpensotian o\envmged. ilextended to the adjtdicotng .ll. cotng .ll.cr o\ pruyel thot, n our vtew nur tntend ta expond the otnbt ond scape.l rhe powet\ ord lu .dons ol tht dju.lnotihg alfcer rnd{ Se.uan 71 on.l that ||aul.l be asotn\t thti nnnddteofthet1 2016.

So, ,n view ol the provisions of the Act quoted abovc and authoritativc pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases mention.d above, the authority has complere tunsdj.tion to de.ide the complaint regarding non'compliance oiobligations by the promoter leavrng asidc compensation which,s to be decided by the adjudicating officer il pursucd by the complainants ata lat€rstage.

Findings on the obiections raised by the respondent F.l. objection resarding force maieu.e ronditions.

The rcspondent-promote. raised a co.tention that the construction ofthc proiect was delayed due to iorce majeure conditions such as lockdow0 due to outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic which further led to shortage ol labour and orders passed by National Crecn Tribunal (hereinafter, referred as NG1).

But allthe pleas advanced in this regard are devoid oi merit.

The passing ofvarious orders passed by NCT during the month of Cohplarnt no.987 of 2024 989 ol 2024 and 996 ol 2024 November is an annual feature and the respondent should have taken th c same,nto consideration belore fixing the due date.

Similarly, the various orders passed by other authorities can not be taken as a n excuse for d elay.

17.

Further, the authority has gone through the possesslon clause of the agreement and obserl/ed that no spec,fic time period with resp€ct to HARERA GURUGRAI\4 ha.dover oa possession ol the allotled unit to the complainant had bc.n prescnbed.

Therelore, in the case of Forrune lnlrostructure and Ors. vs.

Trevor D'Lima and ors. (12.03.2018 - sC); MANU/sC/0253/Z01a,hr Hon'ble Apex Court observedthat a p.rson cannot be made to wair indefinitely for the possessron of the flats allotted to them and they rrt entitled to s.ek lhe refund of the amount paid by them, along wlth compensation.

Altho ugh we are awar. are awar. ofthc iact thatwhen ther€ was no delivery per,od stipulated in the agreemcnt, a rsasonable time has io bc taken rnto consideration.

In the facts and .ircunrsianccs of this casc. ! time period of3 years would have been reasonable lor.onrpletion of th,l 18 In the present case, the builder buyer agreement was exccuted on 28.12.2018, thus the period of 3 years from the date ol execution of IIBA expires on 28.12.2021.Ihat os per HAREM notilicotion no.9/3-2020 dated 26.05.2020, an extension oJ 6 months is granted lor the projecLt hoving completion/due date on or after 25.03.2020 The completion date ofthealoresaid projectin which thesublect unit is berngallott.d to the complainants is 2A.12.2027 i.e., after 25.03.2020.

Therefore, ar extension of 6 months is to be given over and above thc due daie o, handing over possession in view of notification no.

9/3-2020 dat(d 26.05.2020, on accouni of force majeure conditions due to outbreak ol Covid 19 pandemic.

So, in such case the due date for handing over ol possessron comes out to 28.06.2022 14oreover, the circumstan.rs detailed earlier did not arise at all and could have been taken into account while completing the project and benelit of indelinite period in Lhrs resard cannot be given to the respondcnt/builder.

Complai.t no 987 or2024 949 ol 2024 .ntJ 996 61 2424 8HARER,.

1S-qrnrnnnv G findlngs on the rellefsought by th€ complalnants G.l Di.ectthe respondentto refund the entir€ amount ol R!.

28,30,492 /. paid by the complain.DB elon8with lnterest @ 18%p.o., calculatcd lrom the dal€ offlrstpaymert untll the date ofactualrefuod.

G.lr To award th. penctent llre lnterert on the amouot paid by the complainants from tlll thedateolorder passed by this Ld.

Authority.

On the basis ofl,cense no.

91 of 2013 dated 25.10.2013 issued by D'l CP.

Haryana, a residential group housing colony by the name of "lurnrng Point" was to be developed by the respondent/builder over land admeasuring 18.80 acres situated in SectorSS-B, Curugram.

Curugram.This projcct was late. on registered vide registration certificate No.

213 oi2017 with the authority.

After its launch by the respondent/builder, units in thc sam€ were allotted to differ€nt persons on vide dates and that too for various sale considerations.

Though, the due date for completion of thc project and otrer of poss€ssion of th€ allott€d unit comes out to be 28.06.2022, there is no phys,cal work progress at the site except forsomc d,ggingwork.

Even the promoter failed to filequanerly progress reports giv,ng the status of project required under Section 11 of Act, 2016.

So, keeping in view all these facts, some oa the altottees of that pro)ect approached the authority W v,zy of cornplolnt beorlng no.

173 oJ 2021 and 27 others tltled os Ashbh Kumar Aggorwol vs Vatiko ,ld. seeking refund oithe paid'up amount besides compensatio n by taking a plea rhat theproject hasbeen abandonedand there,s no progressolthe project at the site.

The version of respondent/builder in those complaints wirs othervise and who took a plea that the complaints being pre-mature were not mainta,nable.

Secondly, the project had not been abandoncd and therewasdelayin completion of the same d ue to th e reasons beyond its control.

Thjrdly, the allotment was made under subvention scheme Complai.ino.937 oi2024 949 of 2024 and 996 ol 2024 HARERI GURUGRA1V and the respondent/builder had Complaintno.9ST of 2024 989.f2024 and 996 of 2024 been paying Pre Elql interest as 20.

During the proceedings held on 12.08.2022, the aLrthority obscrvcd & directed as under: a lnterim RERA Panchkula jssued a rcErtration ccrtiticate io. thc rbovc p.ote.t herng developed by M/s Vatika l,Lmlted in the lorm RliP lll prcsoibed in Ihe Haryana Real Estate (Resulatron and De!.lopmcnt) Itules,20lTvidereBrst.anonno.2l3of 20l7on l5.092017vaLlduDr.

15 09 2025 und€r secnon 5 ofthc A.l b,d But l splt. oilaps. ol nrorr than 4ycrrs sincc 8r!nr olregrstration, r was alLcscd b| thc . d b| thc .oui!l or cohplarnait thar th$c is no physical work prc8ross rt rtc .xcetl rol \omc digging work and appears to bc rhrndoncd frti .d No qu.n.dt Drogrcss reporl r bernSnled by the promoter g v n8 th. sDrus of work frogrcss requjred under scction 1l ofthc A(1,201r' b.'Ihc hccnsc no 9l of 2013 g.anied by DlCP has oxpr c oi 26 10 2017 and the same is not yet renewed/revLved, whrlc BUA hrs bocn isn.d declanng the vahdity of licensc.

I( becomes amply clear that thc promot& is not only defaulrlns/omttrns rn dis.hrrg..l (s.bLgrttufs underthe RealEstate(Reg(la(ion!nd Dev. opmentlAct,20l6butrtihe samc time, vjolatin8 the provisrons of the llaryana Dcvebpment rnd Resulation ofUrban Area, Act 197s also. .. 'lhe authority di.ected thc rcspondeDt to lurnish thr detarls oi baik a.count alons with the statements ol all rhe rccounts as$cLat.d wrth these promolers. d ln orderto safegua.d the lntcrest olthe allottecs rnd koep ne Ln vrt\,1hc !bove tacts, the authority exercrsine ls tow$ undcr s..t on 36 oiLh.

A.t, d rects the promoter's M/S Vanka Imitod to stop operat ons irom hJnk accounts of the above p.o,ed nameLy I urnrng Porna' e'lhererore,thebanksaredire.tedtofreerelheaclouitsa$ocltedwrth the above mentioned pronlotfis in ord.r !o restrct tho prumotor kom rurrhcr wirhdrawal from the dccounls till iurther ordcr 21.

Itwasalso obsewed that work at the site is standstillfor manyyears So. the authority decided to appoint Shri.

Ramesh Kumar DSP (Retd.) as an enquiry officer to enquire into the affairs ot the promoter regarding the proiect. ltwasalsodirectedthattheenquiryofficershall report aboutthc compliance of the obligations by the promoter with regard the proJe.t and more specifically having regard to 7070 of the totalamount collecn)d fronr the allottee(s) olthc project minus the propol!rcnal. land.ost.rr,d SHARERA S-eunuennu directed to submita report on thc abovc-mcntioncd issues besidcs Siving a direction to the promote. to mak. available books ofaccounts and oth. s and oth.r relevant documcnts required lor enquiry to the enquiry officer in thc office of the authority.

1he company secretary and the chiei Iinanci,r oificer as well as the officer r.sponsible lor day to day atlairs of (hc project were also dlrected to appear belbrc the enquiry olilcer. 'l h.! rve.e further directed to bring along with them thc rc.ord olallotnr.n! and status ofthe proiect.

22 In pursuancetoabove-mentioned directions passed by the authontyand conveyed to the promoter, the enquiry officer submitted a repor! on 1810.2022 1i is evident from a perusal olthe reporl that thcrc Ls lro construction of the prolect except some excavation work and par(r labour quaters bujlt at the site.

Some raw material such as sieel, dust, other matenaland a dieselset were lyinBthere.ltwas also submitted thiL Cohpla nt no 987 of2024 9A9 ol 2024 ard 996 al 2024 construction costwhether deposited in the separate RERA account as pcr the requirements ol the Act of 2016 and Rules 2017.

He was iurth.rl despite issuance of a number ol notices w.€ f.

17 08.2A22 b 1tl10.20t? to Mr.

SLrrender Singh, Director ofthe project, none turned up io lorn thr enquiry and file the requisite iniormatjon as dire.tcd by thc audront\. 'I'hus, it shows that despite specitic di rection s ofthe.ruthority ds w."llrs olthe enquiry otfice., the promoter lailed to place on r.cord the requrs r(. inlormation as directed vide its order dnted 12.08.2022.

So. it shows thxt ihe projccr has bccn abandoned by thc promotcr. [vcn.r lettcr d|t((L 30.09.2022, filed by the promoter contains a proposal tor dc-regist.atlon ofthe projcct "Turning Poinf'and settlemcni wrth the crlsting allottec[\) HARERA GURUGRAN/ Complaint tro 9a7 o12024 949 ot 2424 and 996 ol 2024 therein hasbeen rece,ved by the authority and wherein followingprayer has been made by it: i.

Allow the present proposal/application ii.

Pass an order to de-. er to de-.egisterthe project "turning Poinl'registered vide regisrradon ceni,icate bearing no,213 of2017 dated 15.09.2017. iii.

Allow the proposallor s€ttl€ment ofallottees proposed in the present application. iv.

Topassa.ordertocluballthependingcomplaints/claimswithrespect to the projecr "urning Point" belore the ld.

Authority in thc pr€sent mattEr and to decide the same in rhc manneras thc ld.

Authonty wiil apDrove under tie present proposal. v.'lo pass any other relief in the favour of the applicant company in the interestofjustice.

23.

Thus, in view olthe proposal given by the promoter to the Authority on not being developedand had been abandoncd by the promoter llvcn thc respondent applied ior de-regrstration ol thc projcct rcgistcrcd vid. certificate no.213 of2017 dated 15.09.2017 and was filins a proposal for 30.09.2022 and corroborated by the repor! ot cnquiry officer da({l l8 l0.l0zz rl wJs observed that the pro ect rJmel, lurning Po'nl" w ,' sertlement wilh the allottees in ihe protect by wd, ol re-allolment or Lrd. were neld enrrled ro relund or rhp amounr pdrd b, them Io ll'' promoter against lhe allotment of the unit as presc.ibed under section 18(11(bl olthe Act,2016 providing for reaund ofthe paid-upamount with interest at the prescribed rate from thedate ofeach paymenttillthe datc hy relund oi monies paid by them.

So, in view o[ thc stand taken hy (h. respondent promoter while submitting proposal with authorjty on 30.09.2022 and the report olthe Inqui.y Ofticer, rtwasobscrved that th. proiect has been abando ned.

Thu s, th c allottces in com ploint beoting no 173 ond 27 others titled as Ashish Kumar Aggarwol vs Vatikd il2o21 HARERA GURUGRAIV Complaintno.9ST oi2024 989 of 2024 and 996 al 2A24 "Seetion 10: .

Return ol anount dnd compensotion 13[1) tJ the pramatetfoibtacunplerear sunobte ta oNe posscson otan oPunment, plot,.r bu tldi ns, (a) .... . . (b) drc to dis.ontinuonc oJ his bbness os a deretaper on oiount ol s us pe nston a r reb. n a r reb.a tta n a I the teq isio tian und et t h i \ act o / Iof d ny othe r he shall be liable on denand ro the ollotteei, n cose Lhe allauee wrshes ta withd.ow ltan the prcject, withaut prqudrce to ony oh* remed! ardildbte, to return the onouht t.ceNed b! hin n rcspen of that aN.tntent, plot, buil.ltng, osthecose nat be, wth tntete\t ot such.ote as hat be prcstnhed in th6 beholfincludnlg.onpensadon nt Lt)e nahhe. os Dn,vnled undetthaA.t t'.ovtded thotwhere oa ullotteedoes not hLend towthtltow toh the Prc)ect, he sholl bepoid, b!Lhe ptonoter,nteteitloteterr anth aldetay, ttll the honding over ofthe possesion,dt \uch rcte os na! be pres.nbeA 25.

It is proved from the facts detailed above and not rebutred by rho d€veloper that the project has already been abandoned and there is no progress at the spot.

The develope. used rhe monies ofrhe alloftees for a number oi years without ,nitiaring any work ar the projecr sire and continued to receive payments againsr the allotted unit. so, in su.tl situation complainants are enritled for reiund of thc pard up amounr from thc respondent wirh inrerest at the rate ol 11.100/o p.a (rhe Srdr.

Bank of India highest marginalcosr oflending rare (t\4CLR] applrcable arj on date +20lol as prescribed under Rule 15 ol the Haryana Reat Estare (Regulation and Developmentl Rules,20t7 irom rhe dat. oldeposi( r,lt its realizatjon within the timelines provided jn ltulc l6 of the Harynnr 1tules,2017, ibid. ofactual realization within the timeline as prescribed under Rule 16 of the Rules,2017, ibid.

24.

A relcrence to Sedion l8(1)(b) oftheAcr is necessarywhich providesas I} HARER,\ S- eunLrernl,l G.lll.To award a compensatlotr ol Rs.

5,00,000/- for undue hardships, mental and physical agony and t€nsion to the complainants duc to non'delivery ofpossession ofthe flat by the respondert.

G,lV,To award the cost ofthe complaint to the complainadts 26.

1n the above-mentioned reliel the complainants are seeking relicfw. g relicfw.rt compensation and litigation expenses. llon'ble Supreme Court of lndia,r civilappeal nos.67456749of2021 tltlcd as M/s Newtech Promoters and oevelopers PvL Ltd. v/s state oJ Up & ors. lcivit Ap peal no 67 4 5 6749 ot 2021), has held that the adjudicating otTicer has exclusrlr jurisdiction to deal with the complaints for conpensation undersecnons 12,14,18 and section 19 and the quanturr of compensation shall bc adjudged by the adjudicating off,cer having due regard to the racbr\ mcntioncd in section 72 of the Act.

Thercfore, the complainants.rc advised to approach the adjudicating officer for sccking thc .elicf of compensation and litieation expenses. ll.

Directions ofthe autho.ity 27 tlence, the authorjty hereby passes this order and issues the lollowrrg djrections under section 37 ofthe Act to cnsure compliancc ofobligatnrns cast upon the promot€r as per the function entrusted lo thc authorLt! under section 34(0: a.

The respondent is directed to refund the entire amount p:id by thc complainants alongwith interest@ 11.10% perannum from thedate ofeach payment till the actual date ofrefund ofrhedeposited amoun! as per provisions ofsection 18(1) of the Act read with rule 15 ofthe rules,2017.

CompLaint no.987of 2024 949 nf 2024 and 996 ol 2024 PrBc 2l ur 2Z B HARER,q S- crnrcnnu b.

A period of90 days is given to the respondent to comply with the directions given in this order and failing which leSal consequences would follow.

28.

This decision shall mutatis hutandis apply to cases mentioned in para 3 of this order wherein details otamount paid by the complainants-allottees and other necessary details have been mentioned in each of the complaints.

29.

The complaints aswellas applicahons, ifany, stand disposed oi.

30.

True certified copies ofthis order be placed on the case file ofeach marter.

31.

Files be consigned to registry.

Datedr 11 04.2025 (Arun Kumar) Chairnran llaryana Real Estare Regulatory Authority, Gurusram CompLaint no 9a7 of2024 949 .

2024 949 .f 2024 znd 996 nl 2024 PaEc 22 al 22