MARK DUSHYANT MARTIN vs CHIRAG BUILDTEC PRIVATE LIMITED

ITHARERA #, eunuenntr BEFORE THE ComplaintNo.

305I of 2024 HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Shri MarkDushyantMadin R/o: C-771, New Town Heights, Seclor'86, Gurugram- 122003, Haryana Versus M/s Chirag Builtech Private Limited Reglstered Oflic€ at - Building No.

80, 1" Floor, Sector- 44, Gurugram - 122003 CORAM: Shri Arun Kumar shri vijay Kumar Goyal Shri Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCf,I Shr, Rishabh jain (Advocate) Shri Garvit Gupta (Advocate) Complalntno.r 3OS1 ot2024 Dateoforder: O1.O4.2O2S ORDER 1.

The prese.t complajnt has been filed by the complainant/allottee under Section 31 olthc Real Estale (Regulation and Developmentl Act, 2016 [in short, the Act] read with rule 29 oithe Haryana Real tjstate (Regulation and Developmentl Rules, 2017 (in short, the Rulesl for violation ol section 11(a)(al oi the Act wherein it is inter alia prcscribed that the promoter shall be responsible fo. all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provrsion ol the Act or tite rules and regulatioDs made ther. under or to the allottees as per thc asrecnrent for sale executed inter se.

Complainant Respondent E G !t s_ RA RA]V RI UG A UR ComplaintNo 3051 of 2024 z.

Unlt and prolect related detalls The particulars of the project, the details of sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainanl date of proposed handing over the possession and delayper,od, ifany, have been detailed in the following s.

No.

1 2 Naryan Singh S/o lhuthar S/o lhuthar Singh, Rajesh Singh, Smt.

Bimla Wd/o Babira, Pooia Ds/o satbi..

SAIT) 6 7 F-1211, ToweFF, Floor 1Z'i 369.98 sq. ft- [Carpct Area] 56.73 sq. fr. lBalcony areal 2R 03 2022 l0 FI,AT 71 .............the Promo.er sholl olfer possession of the Said Flat to the Allottee within o pertod ol 4 years lron the date of apprcvot of buiLding plans or grant of environmental cleorance. vr'hichever is late r (' Commithe nt pe riod")...

11.

0910.2017 lclearance I 4 vears irom date of E.C + 6 12. lDue date ot I oe.o4.2oz2 Possessron Jlcal. ron Jlcal.ulated roiect "ROFAnanda" Villase-Dho.ka.

Sector95.

Curusram.

Afib.d,hle crou. hoxsin Regisrered vrde reS,srrahon no.

184 of 2017 deted 14.O92017 VaLid up to l3 09.2021 17 012016 drred 25 10 2016 VJild uD tu lli 0l.lU2 5 As on Dase no.43 ofcomDlaint Clause 7 POSSESSION OF THE 5 I *HARERA iS- cunrnnrvr Compl,rnt No.

1051 of 2024 Ll.

Total Rt t5 08,285l t,t Amount paid by the Rs.l4 90.000/- l6 09_02.2024 (As stated application by the Cancellation letter 22.02.2022 2:t 02 2022 [As pe, annexure R/6. atpage no.5s or B, 3.

Facts ofthe complairt: The complainant made the following submissions in the complaint.

L That the respondent published very attractive brochure, highlighting the Afiordable Group Housing Colony'ROl Ananda situated at village Dhorka, Sector - 95, Gurugram, Haryana.

The respondent claimed to be one of the best and finest in constructron and one of the leading real estate developers of the country, in order to lure prospectjve custom€rs to buy the flats jn the project including the complainant.

There are fraudulent representations, incorrect and false statements in the brochure. ll.

That the was invited to the sales office and was lavishly entertained and promises were made to him that the possession ol the flats would be handed over in tjme including that of parking, horticulture, club and other common areas.

He was impressed by their oral statements and representations and made an application for allotment ofa flat in thc Project"ROF Ananda", srtuated at Sector - 95, Gurugram, Haryana via aPplication no.

10080 dated 2d February 2022.

The complainani paid an amount of Rs.1,40,000/ via cheque no.

000057 dated 2d F€bruary 2022 *HARERA S- eunrnnnvr Compl.rnr No.

1051 orl024 I as registration amount to the respondent, Chirag Build rech The complainant was allotted a flat bea.ing no.

F 1211 (Type B, 1 BHK) h.ving carpet area of 369.98 square ieet and balcony area of 56.73 square ieet tor a total consideration of Rs. ion of Rs.15,08,285/ in the project "ROF Ananda", Sector - 95, curugram, Haryana.

On 21.02.2022, the respondent issued a demand letrer to the conrplainant raising a lump sum denrand oi Rs.14,88,947.A0/- lot the flat \,i,ithout executing the agreement for sale wth the complainant The complainant made rhe payment of Rs.7,00,000/- & Rs.3,50,000/-via NEFT on 23.A2.2022 and 01.03.2022 respectively to the respondent ior the flat.

That rill date i.e., 07.03.2022, the conrplainanr had paid a total ot Rs.11,90,000/ , more than 78olo of the total cost of the flat to th. respondent without executing the agreement ior sale.

The respondent violated Section 13 olthe Act,20t6 by raking than ten per cent (10y0) cost olthe flatbelore the execution lV.

That the agreement for sale was executed between thc complainant and the respondent on 28.03.2022 for the allotted flat Do.

F-1211 (Type ts, 1 BHX) at 12th floo. in Tower F measuring carpet area o1369.98 sq. ft. at the rate of Rs.4000/ per sq. ft. and balcony area of 56.73 sq. ft. at the rate of Rs.500/- per sq. ft. with a free two wheeler open parking iD the project'ROF Ananda' at Sector 95, Gurugram.

The total consideration oi the flat is Rs15,08,285/- iDcluding balcony area charges.

The payment plan was provided at annexure-B, at page 29 of the PHARER,\ s.-clnLrcnnrtl compla nrNo 3051oi2024 VTI That the date ofpossession ofthe flat is calculated three (31years from the dare oiexccution oiagreement dated 28.03.2022 as pet the general principle given by the Hon'ble Suprene Court Judgement in Civil Appeol No.

3533.3544 of 2017 titled as Fortune Inlrastructure & Another versus Trevor D Limo an.l O,/rers.

Thus, the date of possession ior delivery olpossession of the Flat comes out ro b.28.03.2025.

That the respondent issued a demand letter datcd 20.10.2A22 b thc complainant and .aised an illegal and fraudulent demand ol Rs.5,17,660/ towards renaining paymenr for the flar, including interest for delayed payment at uniustified .ate.

The . ate.

The .espondent had always demanded and collect payments from the complainant without louowing the payment plan as per the agrecme.t, as the respondent had already collected more than 78% of the total cost of the flat before executing the agreement VIII That the respond€nt charged illegal and unlawtul interest at unjustified rate from the complainant on the ground of delayed payment, whereas the comp)ainant always made payments on time which were more than the amount due as per the agreement, as aod when demanded by the respondent for the flat.

The conrplainant objected to unjustified interest being cha.ged by the In March, 2024, ihe respondent sent an email dated 27.03.2024 and provrded a special oifer'March Eonanza Scheme' wherein 20% wa,ver in total interen values was offered ifthe complainant clears all dues by 31.03.2024 ot A1.04-2A24.

The outstanding demand for the flat as calculated by the respondent was HARERI\ GURUGRA]\4 thccomplainant tjll date.

ComplarntNo.3051 of 20?4 lx Rs.7,10,158/-and after discount, the respoDdent issued a revised demand ot Rs.6,75,158/- to thc complainant via email dated 04.06.2024.

The complainant availed the offer and made part paymenr of Rs.3,00,000/- to the respondent via IMPs on 08.06.2024 for the flat.

That the respondent accepted the payment and again issued a revised demand of Rs.1,72,024/ to the complai.ant via email dared 17.06.2024, after the receipr oa Rs.3,00,000/-.

Thus, the latest revised demand ol Rs.4,12,024l- raised by the respondent iiom rhe complainant via email dated 17.06.2024 is illegal, unlawlul, fraudulent and unjustified as the respondent is charging and demanding unjustined inter€st when the respondent has already received more than 98% ofthe total cost oithe flat from x ]'hat the complajnant, in total, paid a sum of Rs.14,90,000/ till date as and when demanded by the respondent, which is mo.e than 98% olthe total consideration of Rs.15,08,285/ ortheflatas per the agreement. agreement.

Further, the complainant is willing to pay all legitimate amount as per the payment schedule given in the agreement.

Still the respondent is charging and demanding uniusdned interest and is not handing over the possession of the flat to the complainant.

Tlre.omtlarnrrr "Dpro*\.J I're rFspond.n (ompanyonvdflous occasions and pleaded for demanding payments as per the payment schedule and deliver the possession oi his flat The respond.nt did not reply to his letters, emarls, personal visits, telephone calls, thereby the respondent violated section 19 of the Acr,2016.

The respondent is responsible and accountable x1. u HARERA GURUGRAI/ the Rules,2017 forviolation or conrravention ofDrovisions ofthe Actand Rules as ment'oned therein.

XV.

That in the given premise and circumstances, it js submitted rhat the respondent/seller/builder/promorer is habituat of making ialse promjses and has deceptive behaviour.

The respondent has earned enough monies by dupiDg the innocenr complainant and other such buyers through unfair trade practices and deficienc,es in seNices and has caused the complainant enough pain, mental torturei agony, harassment, stress, anxiety, tinancial loss and injury.

The complaiDanr hereby seeks to redress rhe var,ous lorms of legal omissions and illegal commissions perpetuated by the respondent, which amounts to uniair trade practices, breach olcontract and are a.tionable under the Act,2016.In the present circumstances, the complainant has been left wirh no other options but approach and seekjustice under the provisions ofthe C.

Reliefsoughtbythecomplainaot: 4 The complainant has filed the present compliant for seeking iollowing ' i.

D'rect the respondenr to complere the development of th€ flat along with allfacilities and amenities Iike water, electricty, roads, parks, et€. immediately. ii.

Direct the .espondent/developer to handover the legal and legjtimate possession ol the flat No. e flat No.

F 1211 (Type B, I BHK) ar 12,r, floor in Tower F measuring carpet area oi 369.98 sq. ft. and balcony area of 56.73 sq.

11. in the project ROF Ananda' at Sector 95, Gurugram, as the complajnant had already paid more than 98% out of the total cost to the respondent as and when demanded, for the said ilattilldate. iir.

Direct the respondent to demand only legitimate payments according to the payment schedule and not to charge any illegal Paqe I oi 25 ComplaiotNo. l0s1 or2024 r s- HARERA GURUGRAI\4 Complainr No.

3051 of 2014 and unlawful amount from the complainant which is not part of the agreement for sale datedZA.O3.2022. iv.

Direct the respondent not to charge interest on account of delayed payments from the complainant as no inrerest is cha.geable because the complainant had made all paym€nts on timeas and when demanded by the respondent. v.

Direct the respondent not to cancel the allotted unit of rhe complainan! as the complainant has already paid more than 98% ofthe total costofrhe flat tilldate. vi.

Di.ect the respondent to revoke/cancel/withdraw the laresr revised demand of Rs.4,11,024l- raised by the respondenr from the complainant v,a email dated 17.06.2024 as it is illegal, unlawtul, fraudulent and unjustlfi ed. vii- Direct the respondent to pay legal expenses of Rs.1,00,000/- incurred by the complainant for filing and pursuing the instant 5.

On the drie of hearing. lhe au(horrry expiF,ned to the respondenr /promoter about the conrraventionas allege{ to have been cohmitted in relation to sect,on 11[4](a) oftheActto plead guiltyor notto plead guilty.

Reply by respondent: The respondent has contested the present complaint on the following grounds: i.

That the complaint is neither maintainable nor tenable and is liable to be out-rightly dismissed.

There is no cause oa action to file the present complaint and the complainant has Do locus standi to file the present complaint.

The complainant is estopped f.om filing the p. ing the p.esent complaint on account of his own acts, o1 rsron. ddT ss,or.. del 'y.

J he, dnd dcqure\en.e ir.

1'hat the complainnnt has not approached this Authority with clean hands and has intentionally suppressed and concealed the material facts in the present complaint.

The Dresent complaint D, 6.

HARERA GURUGRA[/ has been filed by him nraliciously with an ulterio. motive and it is nothing but a sheer abuse of the process of law.

The true and .orrect fa.ts.re is f.llows!

That the respondent is a reputed real estate company having imnrense goodwill, comprised of law abiding and peace loving persons and has always believed in satisfaction ol its customers.

The respondent has developed and delivered prestigious projects and in most of these projects largc numbers oi families have already shiated alter havine taken possession.

That the complainant is a real estate investor who had booked the unii in question with a view to earn quick profit in a short span of time.

Ilowever, it appears that his calculations have gone wrong on account of sevcre slump in the real estate market and the complainant now wants to somehow illegally extract benefits hom the respondent.

Such mala fide tactics oa the complainant cannotbe allowed to succeed.

That the .espondent is the sole, absolute and lawful owner of the land parcel situated in the revenue estate of Village Dhorka, Sector 95, Tehsil and District Gurugram, Haryana.

The r€spondent had obtained the approval/sanction to develop a project known as 'ROIr Anrnda' fron the Director 'loi,,,n and Country Planning, Haryana, Chandigarh [hereinafter reierred to as the'DTCP'] vide approval bearing license no.

17 o12016 dated 25.10.2016 unde. the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 and the Haryana Development and Regulation of, Urban Areas Rules, 1976 read with the Affordable Croup Housing Policy, 2013 issued by the Covernment of Haryana vide the Town and Country Planning Departnrent notiflcation dated 19.08. ted 19.08.2013 as ComplaintNo. l05l of 2024 HARERA GURUGRAIU amended from time t. tihe 'Affordable Scheme Pol,cy'). vi.

That the respondent had obtained the approval on the building plans from DTCP vide lefter bearing Memo no.Zp- 1133/SD(BS)/2016/26738 dated 07.12.2016 and the environment clearance bearing no.

SEIAA/HR/20171659 dated 09.10.2017 lrom the State Envjronmenr Assessment Authority, Haryana for the project in question.

Moreover, the respondent in compliance olall laws including th€ Act, 2016 has registered rhe project in quesrion wirh this Authorty and this Authority after scrut,ny ofall the relevant documerts and completing its own due d,ligence has issued a registration certiFcate beanng no.

184 of 2A17 complaintNo.3051 o12024 lherern after referred to as vii.

That the complainant, after checking the veracity of the said project had applied for auotment oa an apartment vide his booking application form on 02.02.2022.

The complainant agreed to be bound by the ierms and conditions of booking application form.

The compla,nant was aware and had admitted and accepted vide the said booking appUcation form that he by the way ofsaid application rorm had applied in the said project under the Aliordable Group Housing Colony being developed by rhe respondent under the Aliordable Scheme Pol,cy and had understood all thc linritations and obligations after being provided trith all the information and clarifications.

The complainant was aware that all the paymcnt demands towards the total sale consideration were to be demanded by the .espondent strictly as per the said policy and only after being completely satislied about the sanre, had made the booking with GURUGRAI,/ HARERA Compl,'nt No.

305I of 2024 ent.

Moreover, the complaiDant had also perused and signed annexure-A of the application form which contained the payment plan which specifically stated the stage ofpayments. fpayments.

That the payment plan olthe unir applied tbr was srrictly as per the notified Affordable Scheme Policy, 2013.

The relevant ctause i.e., s (iii){bJ of the said policy is reproduced h.reunder: ''b An! pe.sons intcrested to opptrlor otlotncntofltotin rspany to \u.h odvertk.tncnt h! the colontzet no! .ppl! an the prcsctihed oppliatian f..nt alans \eth s% ah.unt ol the tatal coe ol the ltat.

Altsuh upplicontt slnllbe elisible fo. on intercn ot the rate aJlo% pe. dnnun an the b.okins amount rcceired br the developer lor o period beyond 9a dots lrod the close of booking till rhe dote al dttotn)ent oI )lot or rcfund ol bookins onount as the case no! be The opplicot@n eitt be requied b Aeposit odtlninnal2A% anoLnt of the tdal cast of th. fat ot the tihe afotlotncnt aJ the loL The bdlunce Tsak anoLht ||tll be recaverca tn six equote.l si^ nonthly insto tlnents spreod ovet three leor penod That the complainant was a successful allottee in the subsequenr draw ollots and was allotted a unit from the leit over unts and as per.lause 5(iiil[k] of the policywhjch is reproduced he.eunder:- ''k ir.oseaIrc otlohent rcstttins o$er st etuierolfososwettos altatnentoJt.It ove.llut|, the naxmun on)atnt recaeetobl. at the tine afsLch allotneht shotlbe eqavalent ta thc a,nount polobte b! theotherollottees in thc prcjectatthat stoge The complainant was allorted an apartment no.

F-1211, 12th floor, in Towcrl having carpet area of 369 98 sq. fr. in the said project.

Hence, as per the Affordable Housing Policy,2013, the complainant was liable to pay the payment demands jn consonance and equivalent to the payme.t demands made with the other allottees ol the p.ojcct who had initially made the booking with thc..spondent.

That the respondent completed the construction of the tower in which the unit allotted to the complainanr was locared and olfered the possession to the respondent vide offe. of possession ffHARERA #- crnrcnau Compla'nr No l051ot2!24 dated 23.02. ted 23.02.2022-As per rheAfordable Housing Poticr 2013, the due date to hand over the possession ofa unit is 4 years from the date of approval ol the building plan or the granr ol the eDvironment clearance, whichever is later.

The said facr was also reproduced eventually in .lause 7.1 oi the agreemenr which was executed between the conrplainant and the respondent.

Hence, the due date to hand over the possession oi the unit was 09.10.2021.

Furthermore, on account of COVID-19 pandemic, the implementation ol the project was impacted.

This Authorty has vide resolutions already have granted a relaxation of six months period to rll those projects which were due to be complered between Ma.ch 2020 and l\,larch 2022.

Thus, the due date to handove. the possession of the un,t was 09.04.2022.

Hence, the possession was oliered by the respondent to the complainant before the lapse of the due date to handover the possession :rnd no default was committed by the respondent.

The complainant was required as per the said oft'e. ofpossession to make complete payment towards the due amount as well as to complete the documentation formalities and the respondent accordingly sent a demirnd letter dated 23.02.2022 .equesting the complainant to make payment of Rs.14,89,014/ .

The complainant only made part payment of the said demanded amount and the respondent was constrai.ed to send another demand letter dated ?5 02-2022 ta rhe complainant demanding the remaining anount o4Rs.8,20,104/ fro m the complainant.

That on the basis ofthe application, an agreementwas sent by rhe respondent to the complainant.

The complainant signed the agreement only alter be'ng lully awrre ol all the Iimitations and lr $- F]ARER., GURUGRAI/ Complainr No.3051 of 2024 obligations and aiter being completely satisfied with the ternB and conditions of the said agreement.

Thus, the agreement for sale was executed between the parties on 28.03-2022.

8.03-2022.

Subsequently, an allotment letter was issued in favor of complainant confirming the allotment ol the said unit to the complainant.

The said issuance olallotment letterwas a iormality which had to be complied with as the essence of the allotment being the unit number and size had already been intimated to the conrplaiDant vide the offer ofpossession letter date d 23.02.2A22.

That prior to the issuance of the said allotment letter, all rhe payment demands were be,ng demanded and paid in pa.t by the conrplainant to the respondent as per the Policy in questioD and noobie.r on !,hdr\o"verwere rdr5ed byhim. xiv.

That the conrplainant in continuation oa his defaults failed to remrt his dues despite severdldemand letters, reminders through several telephonic conversations by the respondent.

The respondent was constrained to send another reminder letter dated 08.11.2023 requesting the complainant to make further payments.

That the respondent had vide jts offer ol possession letter dated 23.02.2022 to the complainant offe.ed the possession ol the allotted unit after obtaining the occupation certificate.

Furthermore, the respondent was completely willing to handover the actual, physicalpossession ofthe said unit to the complainant.

However, on account ol the defaults committed by the complainant in making the timely payments, the respo.dent was not in a position to handover the possession olthe said unit to the t s_ HARERI\ GURUGRA[/ The co mpla ina nt was aware that as per clause 1.4 and 2.2 and 5.1 oithe agreement, timely payment olthe installment amount was the essence of the allotment.

It was understood vide clauses 11.7 olthe booking application form and 1.13 olthe agreement and as per clause 5(iii)(i) oi the Affordable Scheme Policy, 2013, rhar if the allottee falls to make the payment towards the demanded anrount, then the respondent would be entitled to terminate the allotment by issuing the cancellation letter. on letter.

On account oidefaulrs committed by the complainant, the respondent was lelt with no other choice but to terminate the allotment ofthe complainant by issuing the cancellatrorr letter dated 09.02.2024.

Further, requesting the complainant to visit the oifice oi the respondent and collect the balance il any therefrom.

Therefore, the complainant was left lvith no right, title or lien in the unit after the said cancellation.

The said cancellat,on was done by the respondent strictly as p€r the agreement and the said policy and the same is valid in the eyes ollaw.

That the conrplainant visited the otfice of the .espondent and requested the respondent to restore the sajd unit after revokiDg the cancellation, further assuring the respondent that the complai.ant would be maki.g the timely payment without any delay or default.]'he respondent after being duly assured by the representations ol the complainant sent an email dated 27.03.2024 and provided a special olTer'March Bonanza Scheme wherein 20011 waiver in total interest values was offered if th. complainant clears all dues by 31.03 2024 or 01.04.2024 and vide the said email requested the complainant ro make the payments as p.r the aloresaid plan The respondent vide the said email a.molri.tN. ll{l5l of 2rr74 & HARERA GURUGRA[/ Compl.rnr No. l05l of 2024 demanded an amount of Rs.6,75,158/-.

The complainant out of the total demanded amounr oi Rs.6,75,158/- paid a sum of Rs 3,00,000/ only on 08.06.2024 i.e., 3 months afrer the email or the respondent.

The complainant vide his email date d 0A.06.2024 inibrmed the respondent that the complainant was trying ro arrange the tunds and that on accounr of his rravel plans, he would make the payment in comins days.

That the .espondent yet again sent a revised demand vide enEil dated 17.06.2024 and requested the complainanr ro clear out the remaininE dues.

However, despite numerous remjnders sent by the respondeDt, the conrplainant failed to remit rhe said dues. said dues.

Not only has the complainant ia,led to remit the principal amount but also the interest which has been accrued as per the provisions of Affordable Housins Policy, 2013 solely due to the laults and non- payment by the complainant.

The relevant provision of law whrch enables the respondent to charge interest on delayed payment is ,The balance 75% aDount lvill be recovered in s,x equated six monthly instalments spread over three'year period, with no interest falling due beiore the due date for payment.

Any default in payment shall invite interest @15% per annum.

The project wisc list of allottees shall also be hosted on the website of the Department." Furthermore, the unit of the Compla,nant ivas already cancelled by the Respondent vide Cancellation letter dated 09-02-2024 and thus, on ac.ount ol non'payment of the complete payment demand, the termination of the said unit was not revoked by the respondent.

That although, moreover, it is pertinent to mention 1.

HARERA GURUGRA[/ Complarnt No.

3051 oi2024 herein that the respondent has throughout acted srrictly as per the terms of the allotmen! rules, regulations, law and the directions issued by the concerned authorities.

No illegality whatsoever has been committed bythe respondent in adheringto its contractual and legal duries.

Copjes oi all the relevant documents have been filed and placed on record.

Their authent,city is not in dispute.

Hence, the conptaint can be decided on the basis of rhese undisputed documents and submission made by the parties. lurisdiction of the authority: The authoriry observes that it has territorial as well as subjecr marter jurisdict,on to adjudicate the present compla,nt lor the reasons given E.l Territorial,urisdiction As per norification no.7/92/2017-7'tCP dared 14.12.2017 issued by 'lolvn and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Curugram shall be entire Curugram District for all purpose with offlces situated in Gurugram.

Gurugram.

In the present case, the project in question is situated within the planning area oi Gurugram District.

Therefore, this authority has complete te.ritorial jurisdiction to dealwith the present complaint.

E.

Il subie.t matteriurisdiction section 11(41{aJ of the Act, 2016 provides that the promoter shall be responsible to the alloitees as per agreement ior sale.

Section 11(4)(a) is reproduced as hereunderl uc tcsponsible lar oll abtigotians, rcspontbntiesand lunctions under the prav^ionsalthiActotth. tlles ond regulotions nade thereunder ot to thc attattoe as pet the asreenent fa. tule, a. ta the ossociotian al E.

8. il HARERA GURUGRAIV Complaint No.

3051ot2024 ollottee, as the cose no! be, till the convelonce oJ all the opannenLs, plats or butldinlts, os thc cose no! be, to the altattee, or the connon orcds ta the asociatian al ollottee or the canpetent authoriq, os the Section 34 Functions of the Authority: 314 of the Act pravdes ta ehsure conpltonce of the abligotions con uponthc prcnater,the ullotteeond the reol estote ogen3 undet this Act o^ I th".ut",a1d rcgLt-.un. n..d. t4atou4dor.

9.

So, in view oathe provisions of the Act quoted above, rhe authority has complete lurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non- compliance ofobligations by the promoterleaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adiudicating olficer if pursued by the complainants at a later stage.

F.

Findings on theob,ections raised bythe respondelr F.l Oble.tlon regarditrg maintainability of.omplalnt on account of .omplalnant belng lnvestor.

10.

The respondent took a stand that the complainants are investo.s and not consumers and therefore, they are not entitled to rhe prorection of the Act and ther€by not entitled to file the complaint under section 31 ol the Act.

However, it is peninent to note that any aggr,eved person can file a complaint against the promoter ifhe contravenes or violates any provisions of the Act or rules or regulations made thereunder. hereunder.

Upon carelul perusal of all lhe terms and conditions of the allotment letter, it is .evealed that the complainant is buyer's, and he has paid totalp.ice of Rs.14,90,000/ to the promoter towards purchase ofunit in its project.

At this stage, it is important to stress upon the definition olterm allottee under the Act, the same is rep.oduced below for ready 2(tl) 'ollotte.' in.elatian to o real atoQ praJect neons the person towhama ploaapottnentot buildtng, os the coe na! be, hos been otloted, .at.l [qherh.t u\ lrcehatd ar leosehold) a. otheruBe tanslencd b! thc prcnot.t, and includes the person |/ho sub*quently ocqurcs the sord o otnent thraush sole, tronsfd ot u HARERA GURUGRAN/ atheNtse but dnes nat trl]dp a pe.son ta \|han such plaa aportnenta. buildi,)g, o. the tose nay be, s given on rcnti ln view oa above-mentioned delinirion ol "allottee" as well as all the terms and conditions ol the buyer's agreement executed between promoter and complainan! it is crystal clear thar the comptainanr are allottee(sl as the subjecr unit was allotted to them by the promoter. l'he concept orinvestor is not deirned or refer.ed in the Act.

As per the definition given uDder section 2 of rhe Act, there witl be "promoter,, and 'allottee" and there cannot be a parry having a starus of 'jnvestor,,.

Tbus, the contention ol promoter that the attottee being investor are not entitled to protection oithisActalso stands rejecred.

Findings on the reliefsought bythe complainant.

G.l- Direct the respondent lot to cancel the a oncd flat no.

F 1211 or rhe complainant, as the comptainant has al.eady paid oore rhan 98% of the toral.osrofthe nat till dare.

The complainant was allotted a unit bearing no.

F-1211, in 12s floo., Tower F, in the project oi respondent "ROF Anan.la", in Sector 95, Curugram A buyer's agreement rlas executed between rhe parties on 28.03.2022.

As per clause 7.1 ofthe buyer's agreement, the possession olthe unit to be offe. o be offe.ed within 4 years from approval of building plans [0712.2016) or the date ol environm.nt clearance [09.10.2017] whichever is later.

The due date of possession is cal.ulated from rhe d.rie ofenvi.onment clearance being later i.e., 09.10.2017 which comes out to be 09.10.2021.

The respondent has obtained the occupation ce.tificat. from the competent Authority in respect ofthe said project an 2202.2022.'lhe complainant had paid Rs.14,90,000/ out of toral sale consideration of Rs.1s,08,285/ The respondent has filed an application lor dismissal olcomplaint that the unit ofthe complainant was cancelled on 09.02.202,1, due to non.payment.

The said application was disposed ol vide ordcr dared 22.01.2025, and it wrs Page 19 ot25 Complarnt No '1051 or 2024 t1 C, 12 *HARERA S-eunuenqr,rr comDlai.tNo.

3051of 2024 held that the complair, ,s held to be mdintoinoble- The campLainant is aggieved by cance ation/alleged unjust denonds node by the respa\dent wr.L on ollatted unit in on Atordable Housing Project- Further, du.ing proceeding dated 04.02.2025, the counsel for the respondent stated that the respondent is exploring amicable settlenrent includi.g handing over the possession of the unit af,ter its 13.

Consequently, based on this asscssment, the Autho.ity concludes thnt the legal status of the unit remains unchanged, and no transfer of ownership or rights has been taken place.

Further, the respondent company has also showed its inte.est to set aside the termination letter and to restore the unit to the complainant as the complainant has paid 98.78% of the sale consideration. ln view of the same, the crncellation letterdated 09.02.2024, is herebyset aside. c.II Direct the respondent to.omplete the d€velopnrent of the flat along with all tacilittes and amenitier lik€ water, elecricity, roads, parks, et.. arks, et.. imm€diat€ly, c,llI Directthe respondent/developer to handover the legal and legitimate possession of the flat No, F-1211 (TyDe - B, 1 BHn at 12rt floor in Tower F measu.ing carpet area of369,9a sq, ft. ard bal.ony area of 56,73 sq.n.hth€proiect'ROFAnanda'atSector95,Gurugran,asth. complai.atrt had alre.dy paid nore than 98il0 out olthc totalcost to the responde.tasand whe. dematrded, forthe said flat till dat€.

14.

On the documents and submissions made by both the parties, the Authority observes that the respondent has completed th. construction of the unit aDd obtaincd the occupation certificate on 22.02.2022 from the competent authority The buyer's agreement was executed betlveen the partres herein on 2A.03-2022, after obtaining occupation certificatc.

It implies that a ready to move'in property was offere.l to the complainant and who was aware about the fact that the construction of the tower where the subiect unit is situated has already been completed.

In the prescnt case, the complaiDant intends Page 20 ol25 *HARERA dh crnrcnnu a.mn rintN.

1o51.f7n74 to continue with the project and seeking direction for handover he possession ofthe unit.

15.

After consideration of the facts and circumstances, the authority is of view that as per section 19(6) and 19(7) of the Act every allottee is required to make necessary payments as peragreement for sale along with prescribed intereston outstanding payments and to take physical possession of the apartment as per section 19(10) of the Act.

In view ofthe same, compla,nant/allottees shall make the requisite payments as per the provisions of sect,ons 19(61 and (7) ofthe Acl 20r6 and to take physical possession of the subject unit within two months from the date ot this order as the 0C in respect of the said project has already been obtained by it from the competelt authority. authority.

Further, the complainant is directed to execute the conveyance deed upon payment of requisite stamp duty by them as per normg ofthe state govemment as per section 17 of the Act as per their pbligation under section I9( 111 of rhe Acr wilh 3 month5 from rhedate of $,s order.

G,Iv Dire.t the rcipondet to denand oDly legltlmate payments ac.ordlbg to rhe peDbtrt sh.dul€ ad not to cha.ge any illeSal a.d urlawtul amount froF the .odptainant which i3 not p.n oa the agr€emert for sale rl.red 28.03.2022. c.v Dlred rhe rclpondent not to charye int Test on aaouat of delayed paymerB frcD tte @rplahart as no lntsrest is .hargeabL b.cause the complrina.t had made all payments on time as anil wheD demand€d by the respoDdent c-vl Direct the respondent to revoke/@n el/r..lthdEw th.latest rcvB.d demand of Rs.4,12,024l- mised by tte respordert ,iom the complainanr via €mail dated 17.06,2024 as ii is ill€aal, uDla$'tul, fraudulent and unlustifi ed, 16.

In the above mentioned reliefs, the compla,nant has sought that the respondent be restrained and direct it not to charge any illegal and unlawful amount from the complainant which is not part of the agreement for sale, not to charge any delay payment interest, and to withdraw the latest revised demand of Rs.4,12,024l- raised by the respondent from the complainant via email dated 17.06.2024 as it is illega1, unlawful, fraudulent and unjustifi ed.

17.

The inierest'as defined under section 2[za) oathe Act provides that the rate olinterest 6char8eable kom the allottees by the promoter, in case of delault, shall be equal to the rate oi interest which the promoter shall be 1iab1e to pay the allottees, in case of default.

The relevant section is reproduced below: "ko) ihte.est' heohs the rates ol interest payoble b! the p.onotet or the ollattee, as the cae nor be. ae nor be.

E{plahotioh Fot the purpov ol this clduse (i) the rote af inErest charqeobte fioh the ollottee b! the pranater, in cae of defoult sholl be equol to the tute oI interest wht.h the ptonoter shatl be liobte b pa! tlte allottee, in cae of deloLtt. (\t) the inte@sr porabte b! the prcnoter ta the ollottee sholl be lion the .lote the pro ot r receited the anount or on! part thereofti the dote theonoLnt ot potth{eofand interestthereon n relundet), ard the tnterest payoble bt the a ottee to the pronoter shall be ftom the aoE ke ollottee dehulb in poyndt to the ro otct till thedote t 6 potdi 18.

As per clause 2(za) oi the Act, 2016, the Authority is of the view that the respondent can charge interest on the delay payments /maintenance dues from the complainant at the prescribed rate i.e., 11.10% which is the same as is being granted to the complainant in case of delayed possession charges.

19.

Fu.ther, here the complainant has stated that the respondent should bc restrained from charging any payment that is not part of the agreement ior sale dated 28.03.2022.

The Authority is olthe viewthat the respondent/promoter shall not charge anytbing from the complainant which is not the part of the buyer's agreem€nt as well as the Affordable HousiDg Policy, 2013.

20.

The complainant has sought the reliel regarding revoking/cancelling /withdrawins the demand ol Rs.4,12,024/ raised by the respondent *HARERA d[. crnrcnnur ComplainrNo 3051 otZ024 Pcge 22 nl2s irom the complainant vide email dated 17.06.2024.

The Authority obseryes that the said email is annexed ar page no. page no.

113 of the replyand the contents ofthe emailare as iollows: "CASIT PAYMENT SEALL NOT BE ACCEPTED l+) Denond leter = Rt4,12,023/ Please bclaw atcount detoils to po! lor detnond lette.onauntr Ca pon!

Nante.

Chitog BLtlte.

P.tvate t,intied Alc No 12371131443952 IFSC Catle: PUNBAA9A710 Donk Notnc: Pun)o b Notioho t Bo n k vau ate tequ.sted to kin.lly.lear the dues ond shorc the polheht deto s. ht deto s.

Tha n k s far tau t undc*o n di n g, sLppo tt an d ca r pa rc a on 'thanks and Rego^ls 21.

The Authority is oi rhe view thnt the email dated 17.06.2024 wherein the demand of Rs.4,12,024l-has been raised by the respondent is apparendy vague as the respondent failed to mention as on which account the said demand is made and in the abseDce ofany particula., the complainant cannot be expected to make the payment.

C.vll Dire.t the respondent to pay l€gal expenses or Rs.1,00,000/. incurred by the complainantfor filingandpurcuing the instantcase.

22.

Thecomplainant in the aforesaid relief is seeking reliel w.r.t conrpcnsation Hor'ble.tupreme Court ol lndia in civil appeal titled as M/s Newtech Promoters and Derelopers PvL Ltd, V/s State oJ UP & ors. (Ctvll oppeot nos.

6745-6749 ol 2021, decided on 11.11.2027), has held that an allottee is entitled to claim compensation unde. sections 12, 14, 18 and section 19 which is to be decided by the adjudicating ollicer as pe. section 71 and the quantum of compensation shall be adjudged by the adjudicating officer haviDg due regard to the factors nrentroned in section 72.

The adjudicatjng otficer has exclusive jurisdiction to dcal with th. complaints in respect ot conrpensat,on. *HARERA S-cLrnucmv Comphrnr No 3051 oi2024 *HARERA d$-crnlrcnnu Conplaint No 3051 oi2024 G.

Dire.tions ofthe Authority: 23.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function ent.usted to the authority under section 34(11oftheAct. i.

The cancellation letter dated 09.02.2024, is hereby set aside.

The respondent is directed to issue a fresh statement of account within a period ofone month from the date ofthis o.der. ii The complainant is directed to payoutstanding dues, ifanywithin 30 days after receipt ot the revised statement of account and the respondent shall handover the physical possession in next 30 days to 0 days to the complainant/allo$ee. iii.

The respondent is directed to get the conveyance deed oi the allotted unit executed in the favour ofthe complainants in terms or sectioD 17[1] of the Act o12016 on payment olstamp duty and registration charges as applicable. iv.

The.ate olinterest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter, in case of defauk in making payment shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e.,11.100/0 by the respondent/promoter which is the same rate ofinterestwhich the promotershallbe liable to pay thc allottee, in case ofdefauh as per section 2(zal ofthe Act. v.

The respondent/promoter shall not charge anything trom the complainant which is not the pari ofthe buyer'agreemenl as well as the Aliordable Housing Policy, 2013.

The respondeDt is not entitled to charge any amount against holding charges from the complai.ant/allottee at any ponrt oftime even after being Part ot the buyer's agreement as per law settled by ilon'ble Supreme ComplaintNo.

3051 of 2024 $il 89/2020 decided on y, stand disposed otr I appeal nos.

386 as applicalions, if the registry. vi { Ci 0. "1.1 --) (Yiiay Kumar Goyal) ority, Gurug.am r{6l RE PHARERA #, eunuennur Court in 14_12.202 acco.dingly.

Filebeconsisn 24. okl lvle Dated:01.04.20