KARAMVIR SINGH vs EMINENCE TOWNSHIPS INDIA PVT. LTD

ER Complaint No.

1.510 of2024 RUGRAI\/ BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Complaint no.: Date of decision:- lSlO of 2024 23.07 .202s ramvir Singh o: - Hno.-1171, Sector-12, ipat, Haryana. /s.

Eminence T , office: H-3/ Puri, New Complainant Respondent ri Ashok Sangwa Member /I .jat Kataria (Advocatel Complainant Respondent Mehta (Advocate) ORDER e present complaint dated 16042024 has been filed by the mplainant/allottee under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and lopmentJ Act, 2016 (in short, the Act) read with rule 28 of the [?LJGRAI 1.7 // 1B Page 1 ol I & HARER- S* elnuotutr,l Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 A.

Haryana Real Estate [Regulation and Development) Rules' 2017 (in short' the Rules) for violation of section 11(4) (a) ofthe Act wherein it is inter olia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations' responsibilities and functions as provided under the provision of the Act or the Rules and regulations made there under or to the allottees as per the agreement for sale executed infer se' Unit and proiect related details The particulars ofthe project, the details ofsale consideration' the amount paid by the complainant, date of proposed handing over the possession and delay period, if any, have been detailed in the following tabular form: 2.

Particulars "Eminence KimberlY Suites , Sector-1 12, Gurugram, Haryana' Name of the Project 2.875 acres Area of proiect Serviced Apartment Nature of Project Licence no.

35 of 2012 DTCP License no.

Registered Registration no.7 4 of 2017 Dated- 21.08.2017 RERA registered B-0603, Floor-6s (As on page no.

23 of comPlaint) Unit no.

795 (As sq.ft.

JSuper-Areal on page no.

23 of comPlaint) Unit area 2r.05.20L3 Allotment letter PaEe 2 of 18 Details I I +. (As on page no.

19 of complaint) 7.

Date of execution of buYer's agreement 02.72.2013 (As on page no.

21 of comPlaint) 8.

Possession clause :ffi-l 27. :ffi-l 27.

The Compony Aor"a o, i* Pr"r"ntl plons ond estimates and subiect lo oll I exceptions shall endeovor to complete I the construction of the soid Project I within 36 (Thirty Six) months (plus 6 | months groce period) Irom the date ol stqrt ol the ground lloor slab oJ ahe particulor tower in which the booking is made, subiect to timelY payment by the Allottee(s) of sale price and other charges due and PoYable occording to the Pawent Plan appticable to him/her/them and/or as demanded by the Company and subject to Force Moieure circumstonces including but not limited to clouse 27 lond 28.

The possession of the Soid I unitls.) stroit however, be oflered only I ofter gront of completion/occupotion I certificate from the Com\eLent lAuthority.

I I lEmphosis suppliedl 9.

Due date of possession 31.0L.2021, [Calculated 36 months from the date of start of ground floor slab i.e.,31.07 .2017 + 6 months grace periodl 10.

Total sales consideration Rs.55,92,7 40 /- * HARER/\ #- arnuennrr,r Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 Paee s ot { \, I I Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 (As per payment Plan on Page no.

47 of complaint) 11, Amount paid bY the complainants Rs.38,89,760l- [As on page no.

134 of rePIY) L2.

Occupation certificate 11..07 .2019 13.

Offer of possession 24.07 .20L9 (As on page no.

133 of rePIY) B.

Facts of the complaint: 3.

The complainant has made the following submissions in the complaint: I.

That the propcrty in question i e.

Unit No 8-0603 admeasuring 795 sq' ft. situated at Eminence Kimberley Suites, Sector-112, Gurugram' Haryana, was booked by the complainant, in the year 20l3 ttispertinent to mention here that the total cost of the unit including tax is Rs.59,90,992/- and since it was under construction linked scheme' hence the payment was to be made by the respondent as per the construction at the Premises.

Il. mises.

Il.

That as per the Builder Buyer's Agreement dated 02 12'2013' the respondent undertook to handover possession of the said apartment to the complainant within 36 months from the date of booking ie' 21.05.2013, with a further grace period ofanother 6 months' which was not disclosed to the complainant at the time of initial payment by the complainant against the said unit' lll.

That the respondent has breached the fundamental term of the contract by inordinately delaying in delivery of the possession by 88 months as per the registered Builder Buyer's Agreement The complainant was made to make advance deposit on the basis of information contained in Page 4 of 18 ff HARER, & eunuennt,,l Complaint No.

7510 of 2024 the brochure, which is false on the face of it as is evident from the construction done at site so far.

IV.

That the respondent has committed various acts of omission and commission by making incorrect and false statement in the advertisement material as well as by committing other serious acts.

Vide letter dated 24.07.2019, the respondent had offered possession to the complainant.

V.

That the respondent, vide the letter dated 30.07.2019 mentioned that the respondent has received Occupation CertiFicate on 11.07.2019 in respect of the tower in which the unit to the complainant was allotted and possession of the said unit was offered to the complainant, subiect to payment of all amounts and requisites.

Vl.

That subsequent thereto, the complainant had made a payment of Rs.29,14,000/- as payment towards the said flat after the surrender of the other flat against the said flat in question Lastly, the complainant had made a payment of Rs.9,75,7601- as full and final payment towards the said flat.

VIl.

That for the possession of the said unit, the complainant had even sent mail to the respondent on 15.03 2021, to which there was no response by the respondent. espondent.

The son of the complainant on behalf of the complainant had visited the premises for possession of the said unit but again the respondent didn't bothered to Iook after the genuine demands of the complainant.

VIll.

That the respondent has breached the fundamental term of the contract by inordinately delaying in delivery of the possession.

Although it was mentioned in payment plan that 5% of Basic +IFMSD was to be paid at ffi HARER # eunuennvt ,,, Page 5 of 18 Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 the time of possession.

Yet the complainant was compelled to pay full amount and is still the possession has not be handed over. lX.

That the actual payment received by the respondent is Rs'59,90,992/- which included club, membership, service tax, CGST, SGST, power, backup charges etc. that the respondent had pressurised the complainant to make payment for getting possession which is yet not delivered even though it was mentioned in Annexure IIt of Builder Buyer agreement that such charges are to be paid after possession.

X.

That the respondent has committed various acts of omission and commission by making incorrect and false statement in the advertisement as well as by committing other serious acts as mentioned in preceding paragraph.

The prolect has been inordinately delayed' The respondent has resorted to misrepresentation.

Relief sought by the complainant: The complainant has sought following relief(s):- i.

Direct the respondent to handover possession of the said unit in question. ii, Direct the respondent to pay of delay interest @ 18% p m starting from 21.1.L.20L6 till offer of possession as penalty to complainant towards delay in handing over the property in question iii.

Direct the respondent to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards mental agony caused to the complainant. iv.

Direct the respondent to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards the litigation expenses for the filing of the complaint.

D.

Reply on behalf of respondent: 5. ondent: 5.

The respondent has madc following submissions: Page 6 of 18 C.

4.

1,/' #,eunuennM HARER Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 GURUGRAM L That somewhere in the month of May 2013, the complainant had approached the respondent for booking of a commercial unit in one of the projects namely "Eminence Kimberly Suites" situated in Sector 112, Village Balgerha, Gurugram, Haryana, and applied for a commercial unit vide an Application form dated 16.10.201-2.

II. 'that vide an allotment letter dated 21.05.20L3, a unit bearing no.

B-603, admeasuring 795 sq. ft. was allotted to the complainant.

As per the terms of Application form, it was categorically agreed in Clause 13 that the construction of the said unit is proposed to be completed by the respondent within 36 months (plus 06 months grace period) from the date of start of the ground floor roof slab of the particular tower in which the booking is made, subject to timely payment by the applicants of sale price, 'stamp duty, and other charges due and payable according to the Payment Plan and subject to force majeure circumstances. 'Ihe possession of the said unit shall, however be offered only after grant of completion/occupation certificate from the Competent Authority Thus, the question of duress and arbitrary agreement does not arise.

III.

That on 02.12.20L3, a Builder Buyer's Agreement was executed between the complainant and the respondent.

That as per the said agreement, it was clearly stated and mutually agreed in Clause 27, that subject to all exceptions, the respondent shall make all six months (plus 6 months grace pcriod) from the date of start of the stilt ground floor roof slab of the particular tower in which the booking is made by the allottee' Furthermore, it was mutually agreed that if the possession of the said building is delayed due to Force Majeure conditions, then the company shall be entitled to extension of time of delivery of possession of the said Page 7 of 18 / tr HARER #.eunuennivt Complaint No. plaint No.

1510 of 2024 unit'ltiSneedlesstostatethatthetermsaSpertheApplicationformwas reproduced and agreed upon, the same terms were confirmed again in Builder BuYer Agreement. lV.

That the complainants have not come with clean hands before the Authority and has suppressed material facts and thus the present complaint should be dismissed on the ground of'Supressio Veri' V. 'lhat the complainant has nlisappropriated the fact that the respondent had offered the possession without providing basic amenities in the project such as water, electricity etc' whereas' the respondent has obtained the "Part Occupancy Certificate" and has provided all the required amenities at the project site' Vl.

That the complainant has concealed and suppressed the fact that the unit was purchased by him for commercial use' as he had enquired about leasing the property repeatedly over telephonic conversations' personal meetings and emails VIl.

That on 24.07 2019, the complainant was already communicated with the 0ffer of Possession but even after post-delivery of possession offered by the respondent and even post making payment of the dues' the complainant in order to evade from the maintenance charges has filed the present complaint with a mala-fide intention and sole motive of extracting huge moneY from the resPondent' Vlll.

That the respondent has diligently invested all the money collected from the investors in the project itself and has never diverted any funds on any account and even il for the sake of arguments' it is presumed' that the construction has got jeopardized then also it has purely been caused due to unfavourable and unforeseen circumstances' in the intervening periods Page I oflB ffiHARER # eunuennrv Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 which has materially and adversely affected the proiect and were beyond the control of the respondent, the same are being set out herein under: - s. nder: - s.

An erroneous demand ol EDC/lDc charges by the olfice ol Director Generql oI Town ond Country Planning, Horyona, at Chandwarh (DTCP) - ln the month of 19 03.2018, when the respondent was qbout to apply for Occupancy Certifrcate, it faced chaltenges in renewol of License for the said projectand itwas only afrer o period of06 months i'e on 03 08 2018' the DTCP reverted bock to the respondent compony vide letter beoring memo no'LC' 2545/lE(MK)2015/23786, with erroneous demand ond further afier efforts of the respondent, the said demond was rectified qnd was notilied bock only on 01.02.2019.

That further, on 11.07.2019, i e , within 54 days from receipt of revised EDC/IDC demand' a Letter dated 27 03'2019 for submission of documents for issuance of Occupation Certificote was issued by the respondent on occount of which, post lapse of g months, an occuponcy certilicote wos issued on 11.07 2019. lt is stoted thot the Occupancy Certificate, which is to be obtained before offer of possession was applied for immediotely ofter said rectifrcotion Thus' the Force Moieure existed from 19'03'2018 till 01'02'2019 i.e., aqProx.

17 Months. b. lt is stated Bon on Construction Activities, following the order of Nationol Creen Tribunal and Pollution Control Board - On occount of every holt due to NGT Orders or directions ofthe Pollution Control Boord' the entire mochinery of the respondent used to suffer odversely and it took long periods for the iespondent to remobilize the entire construction activity and increased cost of construction.

The delay on account of Force m9l:!!9 is ls fo!!vt!: S.tVo Yeor Order doted Closure of sites (From-To) Deloy, due to halt 1.

2 016 10.11.2016 09.11.2016- 15.11.2016 90 doys 2.

2017 09.11.2017 09.11.2017- 16.11.2017 75 doys 3.

2018 14.06.2018 15.06.2018- 16.06.2018 45 doys 4.

2018 29.10.2018 01.11.2018- 10.11.2018 45 days Page 9 of18 1r/ i &HARER #- arnuennvr Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 IX. f 2024 IX.

That even otherwise, the period of possession of the said unit, as per the builder buyer's agreement is to be counted from the date ofcasting ofthe Ground Floor RoofSlab i.e. starting from 31.07.2017.

Thus, in the terms of the Builder Iluyer agreement, it is stated that the due date for possession was i.e.

42 months from the date of laying of Ground Floor Slab, subject to Force Majeure.

That on account of delays due to NGT orders (09 Months and 20 days), Correction of erroneous EDC / IDC demand [11 monthsJ, overlaps with each other and caused a total period of force majeure as 18 Months.

It is submitted that in the light of the above stated force Majeure, the works at the project site was to be completed on or before May 2019 and accordingly possession was to be offered.

XL That the work at the project site was completed by March 2019 and on 27 .03.2019, the respondent had applied for Occupancy Certificate and the same was granted on 11,.07 .201,9.lt is submitted that the period taken by the Government Office for approval of the Application for occupancy certificate is also covered under force majeure and thus the force majeure period of 107 days is also exempted and thus the period for offer of possession was extended up to 31.08.2019.

XIL 'l hat thc offer of possession has already been issued by the respondent to the complainant on24.07.201,9, it's the complainant who is not taking the actual possession of his unit and the same is now due for execution of Conveyance Deed for which the corhplainant is liable to purchase the Stamp Duty and proceed with the execution of Sale Deed.

Thus, the present Page 10 of18 a 24.12.2018 25.12.2018- 26.12.2018 HARER GURI]GRAM petition is liable to be dismissed as the offer of possession and its payment has been complied with and in accordance to the law and as per the terms of Builder Buyer's Agreement 'l'hus, at this stage' the request of the complainant for refund is neither legitimate nor permissible under law' Xl er law' Xlll.

That the complaint is not maintainable as the same is devoid oftrue facts and thus is liable to be dismissed at the very threshold' as the project stands duly completed Thus, the complaint is pre-mature' especially in the light of the fact that the offer of possession has already been issued' 6.

Copies of all the relevant documents have been filed and placed on record' Thcir authcnticity is not in clispute l{ence' the complaint can be decided on the basis of these undisputed documents and submission made by the parties.

E.

Iurisdiction ofthe authoritY: 7. observes that it has territorial as well as subject matter adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given E.

I Territorial iurisdiction 8.

As per notific ation no.1,192 /2017-1TCP dated 14 12'2017 issued by Town and Country Planning Department' the iurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shalt be entire Curugram District for all purpose with offices situated in Gurugram l n the present case' the proiect in question is situated within the planning area of Gurugram district' 'fherefore, this authority has complete territorial iurisdiction to deal with the Present comPlaint' E.

Il Subiect matter iurisdiction The Authority jurisdiction to below.

Page 11 of 18 HARER . #"gunuonntl Section 11(4)(a) of the Act, responsible to the allottee as reproduced as hereunder: 2016 provides that the promoter shall be per agreement for sale.

Section 11(41(a) is Section 71(4)(s) Be responsible for oll obligotion\' responstbilities ond functions:nder the iioiiriiri if tn'it en or thi rules ond iegulotiont mode thereun.de.r or to the ollottee as per the agreement for sole' ol ro the ossociotto,n -of allottee asthe ,ou .oy i", till thi conveyaice of oll the oportments plots,or buildings' as ,i" ,ori ^iy be' to the ailottee, ir the common oreos to the ossociation of allottee or the competent outhority' as the case moy be; 9. moy be; 9.

So, in view of the provisions of the Act quoted above' the Authority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non-compliance of obligations by the promoter Ieaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adludicating officer if pursued by the complainants at a later stage.

Findings on obiections raised by the respondent: Obiections regarding delay in proiect due to force maieure F.

F.t circumstances.

10.

The respondent-promoter has raised an objection that the offer of possession has been delayed due to certain circumstances which were beyond the control ofthe respondent and stated that the delay was caused due to the NGT'orders (09 Months and 20 days)' Correction of erroneous EDC / IDC demand (11 months)' governmental delays on account of Force Majeure conditions' 11. 'Ihe Authority observes that as per Clause 27 of the Buyer's Agreement dated 02.12.2013, the respondent had to handover possession of the unit PaEe12oflS, Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 to the complainants within 36 months (plus 6 months grace periodl from the date of start of casting of the ground floor roof slab of the particular tower in which the unit of the complainant's is situated As per the reply' the respondent admitted that the date for "Casting of ground floor roof slab" was 31.07.2017 and therefore the due date for handing over of possession was 31.01.2021 (36 months from the date 31'07 2017 plus grace period of 6 months).

The respondent-promoter has raised an objection that the delay have been caused due to certain force majeure circumstances.

However, the Authority is of the view that the circumstances stated by the respondent i cannot be excluded as the same were not due to any fault of the complainant' The grace period of six months is alrcady granted in favour of the respondent-promoter being unqualified.

Thus, no further relaxation is granted to the respondent- promoter in this regard.

G.

Findings on the reliefs sought by the complainant G. lainant G.l Direct the respondent to handover possession of the said unit in question.

G.ll Direct the respondent to pay of delay interest @ 18olo p m' starting from 21,.L1.2o16 till offer of possession as penalty to complainant towards delay in handing over the property in question' 12.'Iheabovesaidre]iefsareinterconnected,thusarebeingdealttogether'ln thc present complaint, the complainant booked a unit bearing no B-0603' on 6th floor admeasuring 795 sq ft super-area in the proiect "Eminence Kimberly Suitcs" situated in Sector 112, Village Baighera' Gurugram of the respondent for a sale consideration of Rs 55'10'940/- and have paid a sum PagelS oflB ^.,' * HARER. #"eunuenntr,l * HARERT #"eunuennll Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 of Rs.

38,U9,760/- till date.

The Buyer's Agreement was executed between the complainant and respondent on 02.12,2013.

As per Clause 27 of the Buyer's Agreement dated 02.L2.2073, the respondent undertook to complete the construction of the project within 36 months from the date of start of casting of the ground floor roof slab of the particular tower in which the unit of the complainant's is situated.

As per the reply, the respondent admitted that the date for "Casting of ground floor roof slab" was31.07.2017 and thercfore the due date for handing over ofpossession was 31 .01 .2021 (36 months fiom the date 31.07.2017 plus grace period of 6 months).

13.

The complainant intend to continue with the pro,ect and is seeking delay possession charges interest on the amount paid Proviso to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the proiect, he shall be paid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of posscssion, at such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rule l'5 ofthe rules: "section 78: - Return of omount and compensqtion 18(1). tf the promoter foils to complete ot is un(rble to give possession ofon apartment, plot, or building. building.' to) in occordance with the terms of the ogreementfor sale or' as the cose may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or(b) due to discontinuance of his business os a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registrotion under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be lioble on demqnd to the allottees, in case the allotteewishes towithdraw from the project,without prejudice to ony other remedy qvailable, to return the omount received by him in respect oI thqt apartment, plot, building, qs the cqse may be, with interest at such rate as moy be prescribed in this ,/ PaBe 14 of18 ffi HARERA #. eunuennM Complaint No.

1510 of2024 behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act: Pr{)vided that where on ollottee does not intend to withdraw fiom the project, he shall be poid, by the promoter, interest for every month ofdeloy' till the handing over ofthe possession, at such rate as may be prescribed " (EmPhasis suPPlied) 14.

Payment of delay possession charges at prescribed rate of interest: The complainant is seeking delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest.

Proviso to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be paid, by the promoter' interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of possession' at such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rule 15 of the rules.

Rule 15 has been reproduced as under: Rule 15.

Prescribed rqte of interest' lProviso to section 12' section 1B and sub'section (4) qnd subsection (7) of section 191 (1) t or the purpt)se of ptoviso to section 12; section 18; qnd sub' sections (4) and (7) of section 19' the "interest t1t the rate presnibed" sholl be the State Bank of India highest morginal cost oflending rate +2ok : Provided thit in case the State Bonk of Indio maryinol cost of lending rqte (MCLR) is not in use' it shotl be replqced by such benchmork lindinq r otes which the Stote Bo e Stote Bonk of lndia may fx from time to time for leruling to the generul public' 15.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the provision of rule 15 of the rules, has determined the prescribed rate of interest.

The rate of interest so determined by the legislature' is reasonable and if the said rule is followed to award the interest' it will ensure uniform practice in all the cases' 16.

Consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i e'' the marginal cost of lending rate (in short, MCLRI as on date i e ' 23.07.2025 is 9.10yo.

Accordingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost of lending rate +2o/o i.e ,tl'1-Oo/o' Page 15 of 18 { I * HARER^ & eunuennvt Complaint No.

1510 of 2024 17.'Ihedefinitionofterm,interest,asdefinedundersection2(za)oftheAct provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter, in case of default, shall be equal to the rate of interest which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case of default The relevant section is reProduced below: "(za) "inLerest" means the rates of interest payoble by the promoter or the allottee' as the cose maY be' Fxplonolion- -For lhc purpose ol Ihis clouse (i) the rate of interest chargeablefrom the ollottee by the promoter' ' ' in case of default, shqll be equal to the rate of intercst which the promoter sholl be lioble to pay the allottee' in cose ofdefoult; (ii) Lhe interesL payable by the promoter to the allottee sholl be from the dote the promotir received the amount or any part thereof till the dote the amount or part thereof ond interest thereon is refunded, ond the interest payobte by the ollottee to the p;omoter shall be from the date the ollottee defaults in payment to the promoter till the date it is poid;" 18.'l'herefore, interest on the delay payments from the complainant shall be charged at the prescribed rate i e, 11'10o/o by the respondent/promoter' 19. moter' 19.

On consideration of the documents available on record and submissions made by the parties regarding contravention as per provisions of the Act' the Authority is of the considered view that there is no delay on the part of the respondent to offer possession of the allotted unit to the complainant as per the terms and conditions of the agreement dated 02.12.2013.

The respondent have obtained the Occupation Certificate from the concerned authorities on l l 0T'20lg and offered possession of the unit to the complainant on 24'07'2019 ie' before the due date of possession.

Accordingly, there is no failure ofthe respondent/promoter to fulfil its obligations and respon sibilities as per the agreement to hand over the posscssion as the respondent has offered possession of the unit to the complainant within the stipulated period' v/ Page 16 of18 HARERA Complaint No.

1510 of2024 GURUGRAM 20.

Accordingly, thc non-compliancc of thc mandate contained in section 11[4)(a] read with section 1U(11 of the Act on the part of the respondent/promoter is not established, 21.

Further, the Authority observes that the complainant has failed to take possession of the unit till date.

As per Section 19(10) of the Act, 2016, the allottee is obligated to take possession of the unit within two months of the 0ccupation certificate.

The same is reiterated below: Section 19 (10)Every aLlotlee sholltake physical possession ofthe opqrtment, plot or building as the case may be, within a period of two months oJ the occupqncy certifcate issued lot the said oparLment, ploL or building, as the case moy be (Emphasis supplied) 2 2. 'l'hus, the complainant is hereby directed to pay the outstanding dues within a period of 30 days of this order alongwith the interest at the prescribed rate of interest @11.L0o/o on the delayed payments and thereafter, the respondent is directed to handover possession of the unit to the complainant within a period of 30 days.

G.lll Direct the respondent to pay Rs. to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation towards mental agony caused to the complainant.

G.lV Direct the respondent to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards the litigation expenses for the filing of the complaint.

23.

The complainant is seeking the above mentioned reliefs w.r.t compensation. 'l'he Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeals no 674445-679 of 2 021 titlcd as M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Ltd. v/s State of UP (Supra) has held that an allottee is entitled to claim compensation and litigation charges under Section 12, 14, 18 and Section 19 which is to be decided by the Adjudicating Officer as per Section 71 and the quantum of compensation and ljtigation charges shall be adjudicated by the adjudicating officer having due regards to the factors mentioned in 1/' Page 17 of 18 ffi HARER,II #,eunuennH,r Complaint No.

7510 of 2024 Section 72.

Therefore, the co plainant may approach the adludicating officer for seeking the relief o H.

Directions ofthe authority 24.

Hence, the Authority hereby directions under section 37 of casted upon the promoters as respondent is directed t complainant within a peri ii.

The respondent is direct iii.

The respondent shall not is not the part ofthe compensation. and thereafter, the n of the unit to the anything from the complainant which passes this order and issue the following e Act to ensure compliance of obligations er the functions entrusted to the authority under section 34(0: The complainant is directed to pay the outstanding dues within a period of 30 days ofthis order alo the interest at the prescribed rate of interest @ 11.100/o on 25.

26.

Complaint stands File be consigned to registry.

K[RA \ Haryana Estate Regulatory Authority, Page 1B of 18