ATUL KOCHHAR vs VATIKA LIMITED THROUGH ITS DIRECTORS

Order could not be pronounced as the authority needs to have the clarification from the complainant under which provision the relief of AR is being sought. Matter to come up on 24.09.2024 for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.. Succinct facts of the case as per pleadings and annexures are as under: S.no. Particulars Details 1. Name of the project Vatika Inxt City Center at Sector 83, Gurugram, Haryana 2. Nature of the project Commercial colony 3. Project area 10.718 acres 4. DTCP license no.      122 of 2008 dated 14.06.2008 valid up to 13.06.2016 5. Name of licensee Trishul Industries 6. RERA Registered/ not registered Not Registered 7. Date of builder buyer agreement 10.11.2010 [pg. 18 of complaint] 8. Unit no. B-125, 1st floor, of block B, measuring 500 sq. ft. [pg. 5 of complaint] 9. Allocation of unit 31.07.2013 (unit changed from 329 to 125, 1st floor) [pg. 28 of reply] 10. Possession clause 2 The developer shall complete the construction of the said complex within 3 years from the date of execution of this agreement. Further the allottee has paid full sale consideration on signing of this agreement, the developer further undertakes to make payment as per annexure A per sq. ft. of super area per month by way of committed return for the period of construction, which the allottee duly accepts. In the event of a time overrun in completion of the said complex the developer shall continue to pay to the allottee the within mentioned assured return until the unit is offered by the developer for possession. 11. Due date of completion of construction 10.11.2013 12. Date of addendum to the agreement 10.11.2010 [pg. 37 of complaint] 13. Assured return clause The allottee is entitled for assured return w.e.f. 10.11.2010 @ ₹ 71.50/- per sq. ft. till completion of building and ₹ 65/- per sq. ft. after completion 14. Total sale consideration ₹ 25,00,000/- [pg. 21 of complaint] 15. Paid up amount as per sum of receipts ₹ 25,84,188/- [pg. 30 of reply] 16. Offer of possession Not offe ed 17. Occupation certificate Not obtained 18. Assured return paid till 01.09.2018 ₹ 33,08,500/- [pg. 30 of reply] The counsel for the complainant is seeking only assured return and conveyance deed of the  unit of the complainant.  Further stated that no other relief is being sought. The counsel for the respondent states that  she is placing on record order copy of the order of Hon’ble UP Appellate Tribunal,  copy of the order of NCLT which is dated 07.06.2024 and copy of the order of the authority itself. Arguments heard. Order reserved. Matter to come up on 09.08.2024 for pronouncement of order.

Since the Hon’ble Chairman/Members of the Authority are busy to attend the 2nd Annual Conference AIFORERA to be held from 16.07.2024 to 19.07.2024 at Kodaikanal (Tamil Nadu) hence,  the matter is adjourned to  02.08.2024 for pronouncement of order.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.  A request  from Shri Harshit Batra,  main counsel for the respondent has been received through e-mail dated 18.4.2024  for seeking  adjournment as he is unable to attend the Ld. Authority  today  and an intimation in advance has been sent to the counsel for the complainant. In view of the above, the matter is adjourned to  19.7.2024 for further proceedings.

The  present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.  Since the similar matters of assured return have already been listed before the Appellate Tribunal on 09.04.2024, hence this case be also listed for that date. Matter to come up on 19.04.2024 for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.  Ms. Tanya  proxy counsel appeared on behalf of the respondent and requests for a short adjournment as the main counsel is  not available today due to illness and she shall be submitting the medical certificate of the main counsel.  On that basis,  the request of the proxy counsel for the respondent is allowed. Matter to come up  on 22.03.2024 for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.  The counsel for the complainant states that the complainant is  seeking assured return alongwith registration of conveyance deed which was being paid by the respondent uptil July 2018 and suddenly after coming into existence the BUDS Act, 2019, the assured return was stopped  and further stated that although the similar matter is pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana but there is no stay as such on the further proceedings of these type of matters by the authorities. The counsel for the respondent states that the very fact of the jurisdiction w.r.t  the appropriate authority who can decide the matters of assured return is under litigation  and is being examined by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court then how can this matter be decided prior to the conclusion of that writ petition pending before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and next date of hearing is 20.03.2024.  The counsel  for the respondent submitted that AG Haryana has already filed an affidavit w.r.t appointment of competent authority for dealing with the matters related to BUDS Act in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court,  a copy of the same is not readily available but he shall be submitting the same within one month. Part arguments heard. The respondent is hereby directed to file the written submissions alongwith that particular affidavit of  AG Haryana. The counsel for the complainant is also directed to file written submissions within a period of one month with an advance copy to the respondent. The counsel for the complainant has placed on record the order of Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court which is dated 22.11.2022 in which it is clearly mentioned that the respondents are restrained from taking coercive steps in criminal cases registered against the petitioner and further clarified that this order shall not be construed as an impediment against the on going investigations in the cases  and the petitioner shall extend all co-operation. Matter to come up on 02.02.2024 for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and the reply was received on 06.06.2023.  Succinct facts of the case as per pleadings and annexures are as under: S.no. Particulars Details 1. Name of the project Vatika Inxt City Center at Sector 83, Gurugram, Haryana 2. Nature of the project Commercial colony 3. Project area 6 acres 4. DTCP license no.      258 of 2007 dated 19.11.2007 license migrated from commercial in residential zone to commercial plotted colony vide order dated 13.10.2022. 5. Name of licensee M/s Shivam Infratech Pvt. Ltd. 6. RERA Registered/ not registered Not Registered 7. Date of builder buyer agreement 10.11.2010 [pg. 18 of complaint] 8. Unit no. 329, 3rd floor, Tower A, measuring 500 sq. ft. [pg. 21 of complaint] 9. Allocation of unit 31.07.2013 (unit changed from 329 to 125, 1st floor) [pg. 28 of reply] 10. Possession clause 2 The developer shall complete the construction of the said complex within 3 years from the date of execution of this agreement. Further the allottee has paid full sale consideration on signing of this agreement, the developer further undertakes to make payment as per annexure A per sq. ft. of super area per month by way of committed return for the period of construction, which the allottee duly accepts. In the event of a time overrun in completion of the said complex the developer shall continue to pay to the allottee the within mentioned assured return until the unit is offered by the developer for possession. 11. Due date of possession 10.11.2013 12. Date of addendum to the agreement 10.11.2010 [pg. 37 of complaint] 13. Assured return clause The allottee is entitled for assured return w.e.f. 10.11.2010 @ ₹ 71.50/- per sq. ft. till completion of building and ₹ 65/- per sq. ft. after completion 14. Total sale consideration ₹ 25,00,000/- [pg. 21 of complaint] 15. Paid up amount as per sum of receipts ₹ 25,84,188/- [pg. 30 of reply] 16. Offer of possession Not offered 17. Occupation certificate Not obtained 18. Assured return paid ₹ 33,08,500/- [pg. 30 of reply] The counsel for the complainant states that the complainant had booked a unit  in 2010 and unit was to be handed over on or before 10.11.2013 and there was an addendum  w.r.t assured return which is Annexure A, at page 37 as per which the respondent had to pay assured return till offer of possession @ 71.50 sq. ft and after completion of the building @ Rs.65/- sq.ft. The counsel for the respondent states that as per clause 32.1 sub clause D  of the BBA it  is clearly mentioned that the unit shall be deemed to have been possessed by the allottee. Further brought attention of the authority towards clause 31 sub-clause H of the BBA,   as per which allottee shall not without the written consent of the developer be entitled to take physical possession including self occupation of the unit.  Further counsel for the complainant states that as per clause 32.1 page 30,  it is clearly mentioned that on completion of project the developer undertakes to put the said unit on lease.  Further stated that  the unit is still not complete and OC has not been received so far by the respondent. The counsel for the respondent states that  similar matter is pending before the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana which is fixed for 22.11.2023. since the matter is sub-judice it is being adjourned till the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Matter to come up on 24.11.2023  for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022. The registry of the authority sent a notice along with a copy of the complaint to the respondent through speed post of which delivery confirmed on 03.09.2022 as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file. On the last date of effective hearing, the respondent put in appearance through counsel Ms. Ankur Berry Advocate requests for short adjournment for filing of reply. On the request of counsel, the matter was adjourned with a direction that the respondent shall reply within 2 weeks i.e. by 01.12.2022. A copy of  reply has been supplied to the counsel for the complainant during proceedings and shall be filing the reply in the authority within 4 days. The matter to come up on 06.10.2023  for further proceedings.

Proceedings were adjourned due to administrative reasons.  Therefore,  no hearings. Adjourned to 12.05.2023 for the purpose as already fixed.

The present complaint was filed on 25.08.2022 and registered as complaint no. 5775 of 2022. As per the records available, complainant has sent a copy of complaint through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint made to the respondent was submitted by the complainant as available in the file. The registry of the authority sent a notice along with a copy of the complaint to the respondent through speed post of which delivery confirmed on 03.09.2022 as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file. Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at the following email address [email protected] & [email protected] and the same are shown to have been delivered on the above email address as per the report available in the file.  It is proper service of the notice. Written reply not filed by the respondent till date.  Shri Harshit Batra Advocate put in appearance on behalf of the respondent and filed power of attorney and  requests  for a short adjournment for filing of reply.  Respondent is directed to file reply within two weeks i.e., by 01.12.2022, with advance copy to the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defense of the respondent may struck off. The matter to come up on 22.12.2022  for further proceedings.