ELANKUMARAN SUBRAMANIAN vs OCEAN SEVEN BUILDTECH PVT. LTD.

HARERA GURUGRAIV BEFORE THE HARYANA cooplainrNo.

7983 of 2022 REAL ESTATE REGUI-ATORY AUTHORITY, GTJRIICRAM 19.11.2.)24 Order pronounced on: 18,03,2025 NAIIEOFTHEBUILDER ocea.

Seven B!ildtech Pvt.

Ltd, Expresswa, Tow.rs, Se.tor- 109, Curugram, Haryara L t. cR/7qal/2021 v/5 0cean sever Buildtech Private (F/4r25/2022 Um.

Kant Vishkarnr v/s llcedn Sevon Euildte.h Pnvatc (R/7eA9/2022 v/s 0cean seven Bulldtech Private cR /4729 /24 22 I v/s Seven BuiLdte.h Privr(. aR/utJL7 /2A22 cR/4022/2422 v/s Sryen rurldtech Prvatc S.v.n ll!l(11([ Pnvrt0 ".",",1,";#k.:"' ,,," 5 v/s 0.en Sf ven Burldtech Privare cR /7la] /2022 v/s oean slkn, Bu,ldttrh Pri%te (complainano cR/7413/2022 o.ean Sev.

Buil.ltcch Private cR/7449/2022 0c.an Se!.n llurldtech P.i!ate cR/14J7/2022 v/s v/s 14 cB/7922/2022 v/s Li cR/74tq/2422 aR/7466/2022 ShaNa.

Kumawat v/s 0cean SEven Buildt€ch Private Himanshi Candhi and Prerna v/s 0.ean Seven Buildtech Private (Respondent) u HARERA GURUGRAIU Complaint No.

7983 of2022 '. cR/1 46A/ 2022 ta cR/1462/2A22 "":::T:'fli;i"::.-" v/s Ocean S6en lluiLdtech Pnvite re. cR/aor5/2022 Arti and Sharad Xa.tMishra 0cean Saen !urldtech Private 20 CR/7705/2022 Arhr,tb), JDd Alry P]\le\ \,/s O..!n !cven IlurLdte.h E1r.te 21 cR /796512022 o.Prn \PvPn lltril.lte.h Pr^rtd a;],*"-,-, 2].

CRt7971/2022 aT* t ] cR/"rrlror3 v/s ocea!

S.iven Buildtech Private v/s 0c.an S€ven Buildtech Pnvate Lalii+nd su(hi wadhsa n.",. s1,.. s,i,raterrr Pnvao (Respondent) (R€spondent) (Responde.t) LaUt KumarTanera v/s 0.ern Scven Buildtech Private HARERA GURUGRAI\,I ComplaintNo.T9S3of 2022 t SHARERA db cLrnLrc,nnrtr cR/622/242t cRl6lr/2021 cR/774/ZA2) cR/77A/2023 l I aR/132/2023 cR/r881/2021 ComplaintNo, 7983of 2022 Ma.tha Paohaonafrai v/s O.ern Selen Burldt{h Private Rahul naia Ram Asarwal n*- *].- J/,i..* o"'*.

Pa.shantMaMaand Poornima Marma v/s 0cean Scven Buildtech Private r.l rn xUnr,rn SubramrniJm orcan S.t liurldt..h I'uvrte O.Prn SevPn BuLldt.. n BuLldt..h Pri!rte COnAMI Shr,Arun Kumar Shri Vijay Kumar Coyal ShriAshok SanBwan ORDER 'l hrs order shalldisDose of 3l cohplainrs titled above filed before this authority under section 31 of the Rel rslate (negutation ana Development) Act, 2016 (herFinatter relerred as rhe Act]l read with rule 28 ofthe Haryana Real Eltale {Requlation and DevelopmenlJ iules.20I7 lhereinafler reterred as 'the rules") ii Chairman L zi zl J HARERA forviolation oasection 11[4][a) otthe Act wherein it is interalia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible lor all its obligations, responsibilities and functions to thc allottees as per the agreement iorsale executed inter se parties. 'l'h. core issues emanatine from them are similar in nature and the conrplainant(s) in the above referred matters ar. allottees of the project, namely, Expressway Towers", Sector 109, Curugram, Haryana be'ng developed by the respondent/promoter i.e., M/s ocean Seven Buildtech Private l.inrited.

The terms and conditions ofthe allotment letter, buyer's agreements, fulcrum ofthe issue involved in all these cases pctains to iajlure on the pnrt of dre promoter to deliver timely possession of the units in question seeking award of possession and deltyed possession charges aDd execute the conveyance decd and others 'l'hedetaihofthecomplaints u nil no., date o f agreement, possess ion clause, d u e date ofpossession, totr I sale consideration, totalpaid amount, and relieisought irre given in the table belonl Project Name and l-ocation is"d- 1orrcr^s."; l DTCP li.ense no. and othe.

Burld'ng plan dpproral drted Anordable Croup housrns rulony Litensee Sh.

Shre Bhagwan C/o M/s ocean Seven (ls,niormai on obuined rrom rhe RERA Registered/ not As information obtained from the planninsbranchl 301 0f 2017dated 13.10.2017 valid up to 1210,2021 occupation certificatc @nstruction and ollet the possession olthe soi.l unit The canpony sholl sincerely endeovot to complete the ComplaintNo, 7983 of 2022 06of 2015dat. f 2015dat.d 1506 2016 IARERA GURUGRA[/ ComplaintNo.7983oI2022 ||ithia live teors Jron the dote oJ the reeiving oI ticense ( coD"nttment Petiod"l, but subject to lorce rennh ng sotc price an.l other thdrses stipulotttt in majeure clouse ol thk Asreendt dnd tineu poyndt of installf,dtt by the allottee(s).

Howevet in case the Canpon! conpletes the consttuctton p.ior ta the peti.d aI S yedrs the Allottee sha not raise ont obieetion ia takinq the possesnon oftq potlnent oI th.

Agreenent to Sell The conpan! on obtointng cetilcate for ac.upotion an.l ue b! the Conpetent Authotties shott hon.l ovet the said unit to the A ottee fat his/her/then occupotion ond u*, subject to the Allattee hoving conplEd with dll the terns antt condttionsofthe tui.l Poli.! ond Asreenent to Sellahd 1(tv) olthe Allordabte ttousins Poticr,2013 All srch prcjec\ nnil be rcqutretl to be ne.esatilr conDlete.l within 4 yeors lrom the approval ol buil.ling plons or gront ol envitonnentol ctqronce, whtchetet B late.

This dote .hdll be rclcrred to as the dtre ol ..nnEncenent ol project Jot the PLtPav ol tn6 palrf fhe lt.ehsesshollnatbcrcnewed betontl the \a;d l yeors period liotn the dute af.onnerem t al #+-- -------- rr, r,rr!r'n,ri ,rri,, r.rlr, ,r i't,,1 Possessio. clause as per Arfordable Housing Policy, G-;;a l ffLIAREIA S- GURUGRAI/ l't ComplaintNo.

79S3 of 2022 l' &HARERA *&, crnLnnnv ComplaintNo.7983oi2022 tA.p.*t, .ta ,o1Fn-E LI HARERA GURUGRAI\4 ComplaintNo.T983of 2022 T RUGRAN4 U HARERA Complaint No.

7983 of 2022 ,:ffi::i ll E,HARERA S*eLrnLrennr,t Cohplaint No, 7983 of 2022 *"1"*! *'.:":::"" *'t"*1 llr. $ HARERI gq GI]RUGRAI\,I T,i l Complaint No.

7983 of 2022 t d15 'q ,t '*'1"*l IP :] l *HARERA -,&- crnrrcnnv Complaint No.

T9S3 of2022 l E RERI UGRA[4 LlA GW ComplaintNo.

7983 of 2022 I of th.

EBA ar pase t gHARERA -&-crrnrEnll,r *'1"*l complaintNo.

7963 of 2022 .r'!lTrl I lb IARER/.

GURUGRAIT/ Complaint No.

T983 of2022 of 26.09-2016 t.

09-2016 t. tacts olallthc complaints filed bythecomplainant(sl/allottee[s) are sim'lar. out ot the above-mentioned case, the particulars of lead case cR/7983/2022 rirlql asAlkalosi Vs.

M/s OceanSeven B ildtech Pvt. r.d. are being taken into .onsideration lor determining the rights ofthe allottee(sl.

Proiect and unit related details lhc prrticulars olthe proiect, the delails of sale consideration, ihe amount Paid by the complainani, datc olproposed hrndinE over lhe posscssion, delay pcrnrd il.rrry, have b.cn detailed in the tollowing tabular form: cR/7983/2022 titled as Alka losi vs.

M/sOceanSeven Bu dtech Pvt.

Lttt.

Er. rlcr!!c++ Details I Name ofthe project m4,l I\.tureolthe proied I AffordabhGroup Housrns Proie.t DTCP h.ense no. and 06of20lbdated 16.0b.20t6 validrty statu.

Valid up to 15.06.2021 - RFRA RF$nered/ noi 101ol20lTdaled 13.10.2017 resistered valid up to 12.042022 [includ,ng 6 months covid-19 extension l 4 Date of environmental 30.11.2017 [As per information ftom planning F lDate of approval buildinS plans *HARERA 4b- eunuenm,t T **".

1 Unri rrer admeasuring tt0 Date ol execLrtion of Apartment Buye/s I Possession clause 12.

Housing Policy (As per branch) 25.09.2018 [Page no.

17 ofconplaintl 507,sth floor,Tower 5 Page no.22 otcomplaint 645 sq. it. [carpet area), 99 sq. ft. [balcony area] Pape no.22 ofcomDlaint 22.06.2019 (P,rge no 19 ofcomplaintJ Note: - Complete copy of the i annexed by t!el9qp!q!!4!rll l 5.2 Possession Time ''The Canpany sholl sincerely endeavar k) canlplete canstuLtion oi the \aid unit within 5 years lron the date ol receiving oI ticence (commttnent p e riod), b u t s ubject ta la r ce moj e u re c 10 use of .his Agreement ond timely poynent oJ instoilments bJ the Allottee(s)- Howe|er compony canpletes the construction pti.)r ta the periotl af5 !turs the Allottee sha!lnat ruise on in taking the possession olter payment of remo intng sale price and athcr charges stipulated it1 the tt Sell 7he Campany on obtoinitlg certilcate Jar accupat ar accupatjon and use by the ConPttert tluthatlq) hdnd av{ the sald unit ta the Allottee lar his/her/their occupotion and use, subject ta the A11 camplied with (1ll the terms and candniansofthe soid Policy ond Agreenent to Scll and poymencs made as Ft Poy!1at Pktr." r (iv) All such projects shall be r€quired to be necessarily completed within 4 years from the date of approval of building plans or grant of envlronm€ntal clearanc€, whichcver is later.

This date C.mplaint No.7983 of 2022 planning {i UI {tr HARERA GURUGRAl\/ shall be referred to commencement of purpose ofthe policy.

14.

16. n treo L r,-tr-zutz on paE l 18.

Due dateofpossession CoDrpletion.ertificate 30.05.2022 (Calculated ar 4 years fiom date of approval oi env,ronment clearance i.e., 30.11.2017 b€ing later as per policy, of 2013 + 6 months as per HARERA notification no.

9/3-2020 dated 26-05-2020 fot the projects having o.rlDanon certificate completion date onr,r after 25.03.2020J Rs.26,29,500/- 07.0 LIr,rg oicomlraintl 4.1 of BBA on page 22 of by t t26,9a.?92/- (As per ledser dated I 11 112022 No lues.etiircate is e(l 6-2022 e no.

28 I], Facts otthe complaint 'lh. conrplaitrrnt has made the followjng submiss ions in thecomplainL - 1.

That relying on the r€ resPondent about the booked an apartment in known under the name a tations. warranties, and assurances of the deliver) ol possession, the complain.nl real estate development oi the respondent, sryle of Expressway'lowers" at sector 109, tl" nd curugram, under ihe Affordable Housins PoUcy, 2013.

That since the booking ofthe unit otthe comPlaiDant trlldate, drc complainant(s) had been continuously harassed by the defaultntg conduct ot the respondent, which shallbe noted as under. ll That the complainant was allotted an apa(ment bearing no.

507, srh floor, in Tower 5 havtnS 64 5 sq. ft]cdrper area and 99 sq. ft. balcony area in proied P. proied P.r€ la ol,+4 Conplaint No- 7983 of2022 27 ofcomplaint) compLaintNo,7983oI2022 HAREIA Gi]RUGRA[/ ofrespondent named "Expressway Towers" at Sector 109, Curugram, under the Aliordable Housing Policy,2013 vide allotment letterdated 25.09.2018.

Therealter, an, builder buyer agreement was executed between the parties on 22.06.2019. l hat after the allotment olthe unit, a builder bLryer agreement was Siven to be executed.Thatthe complainantwas made to sign th. onc_sided arbitrary agreemcnt the terms and conditions ofwhrch were fixed and could not have been altered. that the respondent had deviated lrom the terms and (ondiiions olthe Affordable Housing policy, under the said Agreement and had malafidcly attenrpted to force its own tenns aDd conditions ov.r thc Complainant !or instance, thc due darc ofposscssion has been malafidelv ertended over and above the timelines mentioned in the Affordable llousing Policv,2013.lncase ofdclay in payment,l5% olinterest is charged lionr thc compl.rinant under claLrse 4.5 however, no l)ayment ofinterest has bcen Doted rn case oldelay by the respondent.

Ihe respondent takes.rway the right lo. raising objections in case ofalteration in layoutplan and design under clause 4.8 of the agrqement Labour cess, vAT aDd WTC have been noted under clause4.9(iii), howevcr, the same cannot be legallv chargcd. lhat succumbing to the one.sided and arbitrary co.duct of the resPondent, thc complainant, who booked the unit with dreanrs and aspiration of owning his olvn house, executed the arbitrary agrcement.

That nt the outsel. rt is reitcrated that the respond.Dt had unilatcrally. unlaurlully and a.bilrarily cxtcndtd the due dale undcr the agreemcnt bv soing beyoDd the Affordable Ilousjng Policy, 2013, which, under no circumstance whatsoever, can be accepted. 'lh.t undcr the Sec 1(iv) ot the Affordable Housing Policv, 201:l thc possession olthc unitwasto be delivered within 4years fiom the apProv.rl TII ft. ,.

TII ft. ,.: : ,\RER VTI VIII, GURUGRAIV ot building plan Hence, the due Policy,2013.

Complaint No.

7983 of 2022 or grant oi environmental clearance, whichever is later. date needs to be computed irom the Affordable Housing l'hattill date, thepossession hasnotbeen offeredand theproject isfarirom being completed.

1t is a matter olrcco.d that no occupancy certificate has bccn applied till date and the cssentinl services are incomplete in the project.

Ihe entire aim ol crcatiDg afTordable living has been miserably violated by the respondeDt, due to its inordinate delay. 'lhat the respondent failed nr complying with all the obligations, not only lvrth rcspect to the agreetuen! i(ith the complainant but also with respect to the concern€d laws, rules, and regulations thereunder, due to which the co nr plainant faced innumerable hardships Moreover, the resPondent nrade fnlse statements about the progress ofthe project as and when inquired by the conrplainant. lhat thereafter, the mnlairde conduct and unlar'lul .ctivities of the respondent continued which has consequently led the corrplainantto gothrough mentalagonyandt'inancial distress. ltisfurther $bmitted that taking advantage of the domin.nt position aDd malafide iDtentron had restored to uDlair lrade practices by harassing the complainant by way oldelaying the project by diversion ofthe monev riom the innocent and gullible buYer.

That in case oldelay in the ofler of possession, the complainant has a right under proviso otsection 18 ofthe Acr to seek delay possession charges till thc actual handover of possession.

That accordingly, the respondent is bound to nrake the payment of interest on lhe amount deposited by thc coDrplainant till the actual handover or possession.

That the complarnant has a statutory righl under section 18 ol the Act which, cannol go unnoticed. unnoticed.

Hence, lor thc delay caused in offering the possession, the ComplaintNo, 7983of 2022 f HARERA GURUGRAI\I respondcnt is liable to pay the complainant the delay possession charges lrnder scction 1u(ll of the Act r/w rule 15 of Haryana RERA Rules and secrion 11(4) olthe Act,lrom the due date ofPossession i.e., 26.09.2020 till acrual handover of physical possession after the receipt of occupancy That it is the failure of thc promoter to lulfll his obligations, and respons ibilitie s as to hand over the possession with in the stipulated period.

Accordingly, thc non-co mpliance ofthe man date contained in section 11 [41 (al read wrth section 18(1J of the Act on the part of the respondent is established.

As such the conrplainantisentitled todelayedpossession at thc prescribed rate ot interest tuom the due date till the phvsical handover ol possession as per provisions ofsection 18[1) ofthe Act.

That the respondent has utterly lailed to iulfil its obligation to deliver the posscssion of the apartment rn time and adhere to thc contentions ol the agreementwhich has cause4 mental agony, harassment, and huge losses to rhe complainant, hence th€ present complaint. 'lhat it is a matter of iact tirat the CST was impl.mented on 01.07.2017' 'I'hereaficr, !v.e.f.

01.04.2019, thc rates of imposition ol GST were revised Iror an Aifordable Housing Project, rhe rate that can be charged from the / L% sithout nlput tax credit or , 8o/. wiih input t.x creditj That the promoterwasgiven an option to either charge GSTat the new rates or continue charging the same at the old rates.

That the promoterhas beeD chargjng GST @ 12% and @ 8% from the complainant, as ,s also evident from the demand letterdated 15.05.2020, however, no input tax credil/ I l'C was given to the comPlninant The respondent has been crcdited Rs 49,040/- while raising the last demand dated 15 05.2022 however, no x XI xtl x t.

7983 of 2022 . of 2022 .- 1?ER GURUGRA[/ such amount was adjusted in thc ledger aacount.l-he demand lette. issued by the respondent annexed her.lvith show ihe payment made by the complarnants.

Ihat desPite having made the Pavment of the lawlul .leman ds, no inp ut tax credit, o r profiteering beneflt has been granted to the That the respondenr has be.n acting in uhnost nralalide and depriv'ng the complainant from enjoyins the benefits reserved to him in law and bv the government.

That the respondent has always attempted to financially crunch the complainant and take undtre benefits ovcr wrongful gain to the complainant, all ol which catrnot be accepted, under any circunrsttnce 'Ihat as per the Affordable Housing Policy,2013 (read with amendmcnt dated 04.012021 vide Memo No PF-27lvoL'ttt)12020/2'TcP/41) rhc parking space is to be provided at thc rate oihaliequivalent ca. space (E(lSl lor every unii, and il is uDclear as to what amount of parking charge has been levied.

Looking at the ltter malafide activjties ofthe respondent, the .onrplainrnt seeks clear bilurcation of the total sale price, including the charge of parkirg.'lhat in the circumstance, it is seen that an exccssive chargc is being denianded b! the respondent, thiseuthoritv mav kindlv be pleased to djrectthe respo^dentto refund the same.

That morcover, as per the amendcd Aliordable Ilousing Policy, additiorral car parkrng can be provided/sold afrer dcrivinC consent ol 2/3 ol (he allottees.Thatnr completeviolationof thesame,th.bujlderhasbeen sellinB thecar parkingat exorbitantrat.sand encroaching upo n the commo n areas of the project.

Thrt the builder should be restrained kom carrying such llcEal nalofide and uDlatlfLrl activities rn violntion of the Aftbtdable Housing PoliLf,2013. xvl ComplaintNo.T983of 2022 , T \RER GI]RUGRAI/ That it is a settled position ol laiv that in aliordable housing proiects, the builder is bound to maintain the Proiect fbr a span ol5 years fronr thc date ol occupancy certlficate. rtlficate. 'Ihat the respondent, under the clause4.9(iiil and (iv) ol the agreement has i work Contract'lax; ; Poivcr Eackup charges 'lhat thc respondent seeks to put the additional burden ofthese costs over thccomplninantwhen ihesanre is bound to be paid bythe.espondentonlv.

Accordinsly, the rcspondenl be restrained iiom raising any such demand lrom the complainant. 'lhat the conduct oa the respondent has been maiarde since the verv begin!ing.

Desprte having gravely defaulted in the ronstruction olthe unit, the materialbeing used for cpn struction is su b_par, excess monies are being collected from the alloltees, the builder has been committing ftisappropriation of iunds, and stands in violation ofth€ DTCP norms and thc mandatorv compliance under the Act of 2016 !urther, in Septcnlber 2022 thc DTCP hrd also recommended the cancellation ofthe license ofthc projectsof theRespondent$ueto itscontinuous non-compliance' 'lhat thereafter vide anolher meeting of the allottees, conducted on 04.11.2022, with the Chairman, Sl'P, Gurugram, all olthe said issucs wtre categorically highLghted. the Chairman had also suggested the allottecs to app.oach H RERA lor redressal ol bilateral issues i.e., forensic financial audit etc AdditionaUy, the Respordent was directed to not sell car parkin8 over the coDrmon areas and ('as reqtLired to submit the approved site pltrn, showingthe park'ng space. xvlt.

XVIIT xt\ xx xxt ComplaintNo.7983oi2022 fb HARERA GURUGRAN/ That in ljght oi thc above, rn ordcr to safeguard the interests ol thc complainantand save the complainant fronr beiDg wronglully preiudiced by the unlailful conduct ofthe respondent and in line with the suggestion of the Chalnnan, STP, it is nost humbly .equested that a localcommissioner b. appointed io can y on the follorring tasksl i To ascertain the stage olconstruction of(he prol.ctl . l o \"'. . l o \"'.ty illhe cornru, riori LtuJlrry L ub_Prr: , To veriiy the illegalcar parkingbeing sold by the respondent, z'loveri[,isthedevelopmentisinaccordancewith thesiteplan; Additionally, a forensic audit of the books of accounts be conducted to verilfi ;'lhetotalanrountoimoniescollectedbytheallotteesof theproject; , The totalanrount ofmonies yet to be collected from the allottees; ' Thc totnl amount ol monies utilised towards the constructron /dcvclopment olthe protecti , The expenditure yet to bc incurred towards the consn'uction dcvelopmert of the prolecti ; If the lund iiom the allottPes is being maintained in the escrow account / The records of the accountant verirying the disbursement of monies towards expenditure dooe lor the construcnon/development ot the z AscertaiD whether 70% oi the deposit by the allottees was being depo( ted n.r teparate bqnk account. 'l\dr:he-ee*rr"ronorrhFbroied hasbeene\p.rFd srn(e l2.l0l02l dnJ the same has not been renewcd till date.

That accordnlglv, the respoDdent hrd coDrmitted dcfault oi sectron 6 of the R[ltA Act and hence pcnnl p.oceedings in this regard be initiated against the respondent Moreove', ifter an inordinate delay in the project, no specific date for handing over ol thc possessjon has been uDdertaken by the respondent and hence, thc respondctrt should be directed to provide on affidavrt, the date bywhen the valid and legalofier ofpossession shall be made by the respondent' xx . xxl xxlv. |IARERA GURUGRA[/ efsought by (:.

7. 'l he complaLndnt has souBht following l.

To restrain the respondent ftom terminating the unit till the ffnal disposal of the present complainL ll.

To appoint a local commlssiqnerto carryoutthe tasks as mentioned in para 33 ofthe complaint.

IU.

To conduct a forensic aud,t pfthe books of accounts ofthe respondent as t\r pertask mennoned in para 34 oithecomplaint. complaint.

I o direct the respoDdent to provide on affidavit, a date t,ll which a valid ofi'er of possession shall be Siven lf the respondent fails to provide the same, penal proceedings for violation of section 4(2)(l)(C) be inltiated agriDst the respon.lent.

V To d irect th e respoDde nt to p rovide a valid p hvsical possession after recc ipt ol occupancy certilicate, vl.

To direct ihe respondent to give delayed possession charges @ MCLR+2% liom 26.09.2020 till thedateoiactual physicd posscssion attheprescribed rile olintcrest: relierG); grve anli-protrteering credrr/input V I I I 'lo d ireci the respo ndent to execute th e conveyan ce deed aater oiiering va lid vl1. lo direct the respondent to lhe complainant; oifer oipossession to the complainantl l\. lo reslrln thc respondent lronr demanding Labour Cess, VAT, Work ContractTax and Power BaAkup charges; X 'Io direct the respo ndent to Eive bitirrcation ol th c total sale price ,nclu dinE the clariication ol cost of parking under the Affordable Housing Policv, xl 2013 lu rFrrrl rh, respondent Irom chirging anv mJrnrendn(e chd SP\ in futLtre ns the complainant is notbound to pay lhe same unde.theAffordable Housing Policy,2013; To rest;iin the respondent fronr denranding car parking charges ironr ihe xtT complainant; XIII.

To dkeact,on rorviolation ofsection 6, i.e., non-extension ofreg'stration ol XlV.

Grant any other relief as this Hon'ble Authoritv deems fit in the peculiar lacts and circumstances ofthe prcsent complainl U.

0n thc date of hcaring, the authority explained to the respondent/ p'onroter dbout the contrdvenrions as a{eeea to have been.ommitted in relation to s.ct.on I I141 (al oi the acl ro pl4ad Euilty or nol to plead guilty. complaintNo,7983oI2022 D, HARERA ComplajntNo,T983of 2022 S"ounicRAM Reply by the r€spondent 1hc respondentis contesting the complainton the lollowing grounds; I That this Autbority lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the prescnt complaint as vlde clause 16. clause 16.2 ol the builder buver agreement both the prrties have unequivocally agreed to resolve anv disputes through ri That the complainant is a willful defaulter and deliberate)v, intentioDallv and kDowingl-v have not paid timely i nstalmen ts iii ihat starting fronr lebruary 2023, the construction activities have been scverely inrpacted due to thp suspension ofthe license and the ireeznrg oi .ccountsby the DTCP Chand[garh and HRERACurugram, respectively.

This suspension and lreezing ol accounts represent a force majeure ev'nt beyond the control of the respondent.

The suspension of the liceDse and lieezlng ofaccounts, sta.tinF from Feb 2023 tilldate, have created a zero' Lrrne s. n.rr.o for Ih" resDor|denr.

Further, rhere rs no delay on lh" Pdrt ol 'hr re.pold"nr pro,ecr as \t r\ (ov"red under rlJu'e numbFr 5s'o ' )4ajeurc, whi.h is beyond control ofthe respondent. . tlu,rnerrnnltCisLl[/ r9wn]chhr\been? er\FdbvrhPrerpondenr in F urJdrv 2018.

Henre lhe s[rI date ol proje(l r' Feb 20I8 and re5I derdil Covid and NGT Feb-22 [18+18) m]oq!!E lieb 2023 tilldate Totrl Time extended to be l Proiect compldron Date Covrd lock do n waiver NCT stay (3 months +prox. forevery vead!c.E:9- Accounts freezed & liCense CohpLaint No.

T9S3 of2022 HARERA GURUGRAM Nov-23 furthertime to be extended till the untreezing of the accounts i.e.

Feb_ Frnal project completion date (rn case froie.r i' u. ,e"z.dl lLrrtrrerrime wor ld be "dded I ll dnlree/rng rhe Nov_25 As per the table giveD above, the tlnal date ior the completion ot consiruction is Feb 25 in case the accounts are u nfreezed by the competent authority on the date offilingthis reply.

From Feb 2023, the license has been nEpended and accounts have been freezed by the DTCP Chandigarh and IlRERA Gurugram.

Copies of all the relevant .locunfnts have been filed and placed on the record l hcir authenticity is not in dispute Hence, the complaint can be decided on the basis olthese undisputed documerrts rnd submission ma(le by the parties' parties' 'l'hc complainant and respondent have filed the wrjtten submissions oD ft.a?.2025 and 77.A2.2025 respfctivel, which is taken on record and has been conndered by the authority while adjudicating upon the reliel sought bv the lurisdiction of the authority The authority obserues that i[ nas teritorial as well as subi€ct matter lurisLliction to adiudicate the prosent complaint for the reasonsgiven below !i.l Tcrritorial iurisd iction As per Dotification no.

1/9212017'11CP rlateit 14 12.2017 issued bv Town and Country PlaDning D.partment, the jurisdiction ol Real Estate Regulatory Aurhonty, Gurugranr shall be enti.e Cumg.am District lor all purpose with ollr.es situatcd in Gumgram In the present case, the project in question is situ.ted within the planning area ofCurugram District.

Therefore, this authoritv has complete te.ri!orial ju risdiction to dealwith the present complaint- t0.

1l [.

HSLE!A GURUGRA[/ of theAct, 20l6providesthatthepromotershallberesponsible to the allottee as per agreemenf for sale.

Section 11(4Xa) is reproduced as hereunderl Section 11 (I)1he prahatet shoIl- (a) be respon\ible Jor dll ablisotions re:Ponebilnies ond functians u;ler the p.avjions ofthis Act at the.ules ond resulotions node thcteun.ler ot to the ottattees os per the asree ent lor sale, or to the 4$a.iation olouottecs, at the cose na! be dllthe cohvelance olott the dpn.tn.ht plattot btitdin1s, osthe.osc nav b' t'tlkollouees otthe .ann on o r ea s t. the a ssoL t u ti on al ollot tees o. th e.anl petcnt auth or itv as tl€ cdse na! be; S e. t ion i 4-F unct io6 ol the Att honry: dtnolF. t'tyo del a?.\u'c@nP ont' o! tha obl ooLtonr to\t up;; tha panate6, the httottees and the rcot estate osen5 under this A.t ond the rules ant) regulotionsnodetheeundet' 15.

So, in view ofthc provisions of the Act quoted above, the authority has con cte jLrisdiction to dectde the complaint rcgarding non'compliance olobligations bv thc promoter leaving aside compensation which is to be decided bv ecided bv the adjudicatinE omcer ilPursued by ihe complainant at a lat€r stage' t4l(a) I:irrhngs on objectio s raised bv the resPoDdchl l:l obie.tion rcsarding .omplaiDant is in br'ach invoc,tion of a.bitratioD. l llrr r.spondcnt his submitted that the conplaint is ot .8r€ement for non_ not maintainable for the r..r$n that the agreement contfins an arbitration 'lause which refers to the disputc resolution mechanism to be adopted by the partles in the event olany dispLrte.

The authority is of the opinion that the iurisdiction of the autho'iiy cinnot be fcttered by the existence oi an arbitration clause in the buyer's agr.ement as it nray be noted that section 79 olthe Act bars the jurisdiction of civil coutu about any matter which inlls wi(hin the Purvrelv of this authoritv' or the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal.

Thus the intention to render such disputes as non arbitrable seems to be clear.

Also, section 88 of the Act says ComplaintNo,T9S3of 2022 : ' ,\RER -e-GuRuGRAtt/ thrt the provisions ofthis Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation oithe provisions olany other law for the trme being in force.

Further, the authoritv puc relianc. on catena ofjudgments ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Courl particularlv i Nationat Seerls Corporatlon Limiteil v.

M Madhusudhon Reddy & AnL (2012) 2 SCC 506,whercin it has been held that the remedies provided undcr thc Consumer Protection Act are iD addition to and not in derogation of the othcr laws in force, consequently the authority would not be bound to rcfer prrties to arbitr.tlion even if the a8reement benleen the parties ha(l rn arl)itration clause.

Therefore, by aPplying same analogv the presencc of arbit.ation clause could not be construed to take 3rvay the jurisdiction ol the l7.

I\rther, in,4/.oD Sirgh anil ors. vs.

Emaar MGF Land Ltd andors, Consumet case no. t case no.701of2015 decideil on 13 07 2017, the Na\tonal Consumer Disputes lledressal Commission, New Delhi (NCDRC) has held thatthe arbitration cl3use rn rsreements between the comdlainants and builders could not c,rcumscribe rhe turisdiction ol a consumer.

Further, while co.sidering the issue of miintrinability ofa conrplaint before a consumer forum/conrmission in th' tucl of.nr existing nrbitration clause itr the builder buyer agreemeDt, the Hon ble '.i . rl je .. l' I in.asp tltled at M /s Emaar MGf Land Ltd.

V.

Afr oh Singh tn revision petition no.2629'30/20 t8 in civit appeol tto.23512'23513 ol2017 deciile.t on 10.12.201a has nphcld lhe aioresaid iu.lgcnrent ofNCDRC and as provrded in Article 141 ol the Constitution of India, the law declared by the 5rIreme Court shallbe binding on allcourts within the territory oflndia and .ccordinglv the authorit)' is bourd by thc aforesaid view 'lhereiore' rn vic{ of th c .rbove judgenreDts and considering the provision of the Act, the authoitv is ol the view that complainant is wcll within his right to seek a sPecial remedv .,r.,rLahle in r benefici l Act s uch as the Cons u mer Protectio.

Act and RER^ Acl, ComplaintNo.T9S3of 2022 Complain!No.7983 of 2022 2016 instead of going in for an 4rbitration.

Hence, we have no hesitatton in holding that this authorlty has the requisite jurisdictlon to entertain the complarnt and that the dispule dfes not require to be referred to arbitration necessarily.

F.ll ob,ections resardlnstorcc faieuE. lri.

Tnc respondenl/promoter has riised the content,on that the construction of thc prolect has been delayed due to force majeure circumstances such as ban or) construction due to orders passed by NCT, maior sprcad ofCovid_19 ac.oss worldwid., suspension of license by the DTCP, Cbandigarh and lreezing oI n.couDts by HREM Gurugram etc. whi.h is beyond the control of the rcspondentand arecovered underclause 5.5 of the agreement. agreement.

The respondent h,rs htrther subnritted that suspension of the license and freezing oiaccounts, sl|ting from feb 2023 till date have created a zero time scenario lor the rcspondent.

Furthermore, the final EC is CTE/CTO which has been received bv thc respondent in February 2018, hence the start date of project is Feb 2018' lvoreovcr, the respondent company hrs liled the representation that the fin'rl conrpletion date (incase project is unireeze) further time would be added tjll unlreezins thc accounts as the due date of possession mav be considered :s MJrch 2026.

The cotnsel ior the respondent during proceeding daied 19 11.2024, stated that the duc date of possession mav be calculated fronr 01e .lare of'consent to establish' i.e.

05.02.20i8 which comes out to be 05.02.2022 anl further requests to allow the grace period due to force maieure ume Moreover. the delay wds tappened due to asitation bv lhe members of As .urion ot rllottees who ob+rucl lhe construction work at site as a resuh rho DTCP has cancelled the lic+se on 23 02 2023, vide Memo No.

LC-3089- PArvAl-2023/5475 and even th+ Authorrty had irozen Jllthe bank accounts of r.e.

Covid-201q. odn imposed bv NCT from trm" o E HARERI , GURUGRAIV respondent company.

The counsel lor the respondent has placed on record Complarnt No, 7983of 2O22 :nd:ln nrhcE a r.port of chartered Engineer dated 14.0 5.2 0 24 vid e lvh ich bringing out the financral losses caLrsed by the delayed payments and escalated material costs due to delayed payment by the allottees.

However, all the pleas advanced in this regard are devoid of merits.

The Authority is ofconsidered view that the provisions of zero period is neither provided in the Act of 2016 nor in the Alfordable Group Housing Policy 2013.

Therefore, the due date ofpossession is crlculated as per clause ltiv) of Lhe Aftordable Housing Policy,2013 it is prescribed that ".41/ such Prajects sholl be required to be necessarily conplete.. conplete..l wi$tu 4 yed5 lron the date ol opproval ol buitding plans or grunt of enfionmental clearan&, whichever is later.Thisdate sholl be rcferred to as the ''d.te ol canmencetnent of project' fat the purpose ol ./lispolicl.

The respondcnt has obtained environment clearance and building plan approval in respect of thc said projccton 30.11.2017 and 26.09.2016 respectivelv Therefore,the due datc ofpossession is being calculated lrom the d:te of environ mental clea.an ce, beLrrg later.

Iturther, an extensron of6 months is f.anted to the respondcnt in view olnotilication no.9/3-2020 dated 26.05.2020, on account ofoutbreak ol covld 19 pandemic.

Therefore, the due date oipossession was 30.05'2022 4s tar as other contentions ol the respondent w r't delav in construction of the project is concerned, the same are disallowed as firstlv the orders passed bv NGl banningconstructioninthe NCR regionwasforavery shortperiod of tjme and thus, cannot be said to impact the respondent_builder leading to such a dehy rn the completion.

Secondly, the license olthe project ofthe respondent wis spendcd by D'lCP, Haryana vidc nlemo dated 23 02.2023, due to grave violations made by it,n making compliance ofthe terms and conditions ofthe h.cnsc.

In view ofthe same and to protect the,nterest ofthe allottees, the bank .ccount of the respondent related to the project was frozen bv th,s Authoritv L1ARE!A GURUGRA]V 24.02.2023- lt i$ well settled principle that a person cannot take benefit of his own wrong.

C, Findinss on the reliet sought by the complainant (i.t Dlre.t the respondent to give delayed possession charges at the prescribed rarc i,e,, MCLR+zo/a tron 26,09,2020 ri'll the date of actual physical possession attho pres.ribed rate ofintercst G.tl Direct the respondert to execute the conveytnce deed after otferirg valid otfer otpossession ro the complainant. mplainant.

19 lhc complainant intends to contirue with the project and is seeking delay possession charEes ns providcd under the proviso lo section 18(1) ol thc Ad Scc.

18(11 proviso .e.rds as under Section 1a: ' Return oI omount dnd .omPensation 13(t) tlthc tonnter futt Lo conPlcteor 6 unoble ta slve pos*ssian ' t" ap t -. ' nt lat ot L, lJ'u Pravt te.t t|tt whet e u1 uttotee daesnatht.nd lo \rith.trod lion the [a)en ne lrol] bt p.rl, b] the Yatnater, intet4t lar cve.r nonth al Llehtr titt the hantlrt! nQ, aithe postesron otsuLh.nteasnat be Pr.\cnbed ' 20 ls per clause 5.2 t.1ks about the possession ofthe unit to ihe complainants, the rcLcv!nt portion is reproduce as under:- ''5.2 Potsession Time 'tha Con\tuty shall sht.c.elt endeo,or to conplete the construetioh ond ollat the po$ession ol the sdilt unit wthin fve yearc |rotn the date ol the receiving ol license ( comf,itnent Period"), but suhiect to torce nojeue .tause ol thls Asreenqt dnd tinety pdynentPl lnsto(netts bv the Attottee(s)' Ha\|eve' n ose the ConPanv.an9letes the Lohsttuction p.iat to the petiad al5 rerrs the Allottee shall nol toise an! obiedion in taking the posesiot alrer palnE oJ renoining sotc Pri'e ond other chargcs stiputotcd in the agrecment to sell lhe canPon, nh abtarting cntif:uL Jbt oct:upatian ord ute b! the ConpeEnt Autha.iib rhall honn ovet the soid unn tu th' Allottee lot h'/tel/thcn ouupotian antl uv tubtcd u) thc lllottee havins tar\)hcd trtth on the te s onll .a\inians af the *id Policv ond ,lateene tusell a\l p.l)int! nrule o\ pc' l\ tent Plon 21. lt rhc outset. it is relevaDt to .omment on the prcsct possession clausc ol the agreement wherein the possessiDn has been subjected to all kinds otternrs and conditions ofthis rgreement and apPlication, and the compla,nant not berng nr delnult under any provisions ol these agreements and compliance with aU Page 32 of44 ComplaintNo.

7983of 2022 &HARERA compraintNo. mpraintNo.zeB3or2o22 i, GlttGlV I -nd JoothPr\ provisions, formalitjes and documentation as prescribed by the promoter' The draiting ofthis clause and incorporation ofsuch conditions are not only vague and uncertain but so heavily loaded in iavour of the promoter and against the allotte.s that even a single default by the allottees rn iulfilling formalities and rlocLrmentations etc. as prescribed by the promoter mav make the possession clruse irrelevant for the purpose ol allottees and the commitment date fo. h.niling overpossession loses its meanirg.The incorporation ofsuch clause in tIe buyeis agreement by the promoter is notonly in grave violation oiclxuse 1{ivl ot the Attordable llousine Policy, 2013, but also dcprive the allottees of their ri8ht accruing alter delay in possesiion.

This is iust to comment as to how the builder has misused his dominant position and drafied such mischievous chuse in the agreenrent and the allottees are lett with no option but to siSn on {lLxrse 1(ivl ol the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013 provides for completion ol .rLlsuchpro)ectslicencedunderitandthesameisreproducedasunderforready t (iv) t-l d.1ttot , J olt be I "gLtt eo @ bP t " e' at ttt ' -qDlePd w'th'1 4 wors tnn d;. dote olapRrovat ol buitding ptons ot s.oht olenvircnnentot ,-,,. a . " n cnoo "'$u' 1 \r dotp \hatl Lp t "ttt t "d'a o' lhe dat " al , nd em.

Laruq I to't\ppbtpo<e lt\' par.t Due date othanding over of possessionr As per clause l(iv) oftheAflordable Housing Policy, 2013 it is prescribed that ".4/i suc/l p rojects shall be required ta be necessarity campteted b'ithin 4 yeors fron the dote ofopprovaloJbuitdins plans at gront oJ envnan mentat cleorance, whichever isloter.l his ddte shallbe relefted t) as Lhe dote of cannetlcentent al praject" far the Nrpase of this paticv the rcspondeDt has obtained enviro n men t clearan ce an(lbuilding plan aPproval in rcspect of tlre said Project on 30.11.2017 and 26.09'2016 respectively 'l'hcrefo. 'l'hcrefo.e, the due date of possession is being calculated from the date of .*)'HARER' (q eunuenitll environmental clearance, being later.

Further, an extension of 6 months is granted to the respondent in viewolnotification no.9 /3 2020 dated26-OS.2020, on account ol outbreak ol Covid-19 pandemic.

Therefore, the due date ol possession comes out to be 30.05.2022.

2,1.

Admissibilitv of delay possesslon charges at prescribed rate of interest: Proviso to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to wrthdrrw lrom the proiect, he shall be paid, by lhe promotcr, interest f,or every nrnth of delay, till the handing over of possession, at such rat€ as may be prcscribed and it has becn prescrjbed under rule 15 of the rules.

Rule 15 has b.cn reproduced as under: Rute 15- Pres.ribe.l.ate ol interest- [Proeiso to section 12,ectioa 13 an.tsub-section (4) onrt subsection (7) oJsection 191 t1) l"o. the P!ryae al pratio to sectia 12; sectioh 1a ond sub v.tons ft) ahd (7) of se.tian 19 the 'interest ot the tute prcs.ribetl shc lt be.he state Bank oI Indio h)ghen morqinaI cast o| le.ding rote +2%.: t .av.dad thot n q. a r. ,td'P Bank ot io o nd-atanl on ol t.,d ,,."@ tu tL . u, .. l e i' .\a\ t...u-,ed by .d \ bearhnntk len,lin! rdtes \rhich the stote l,onk altndio nav fx tunti e ra tine fot knttthg tathegenercl pubhc.

25 1hc legislatu.e in its wisdom in the subordinate legislatioD under the provision ol rule 15 ofthe rules, hns detennined the prescribed rate ofinterest.

The rnte of rnt.rest so dete nined by the leglslature, is reasonablc and il the said rule is tollorved to award the interest, itwillensure uniform practrce in allthe cases 26.

Consequently, as per websjte olthe State Bank of India i.e., https://sbi.o i., the n[rsinal cost oi lendins rate lin short, MCLR) as on date ie., 18.03.2025 is 910%.

Accodingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost ol len(Ing rate +2% i.e., 11.100/0.

27.

1h.

0.

1h. delinition ol tenn 'interest' as def,ned under section z[za) of the Act pr(nrdes that the rrte oiintcrest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter' in cise oldefiult, shall be equnl to the rate of intcrcst \!hicli the Promotcr shall CompLaintNo.7983ot2022 iEA.HARERI. t- lt N4 e allotrp", rn (a,e ol defrLll.

The rele!ani section is reproduced '(za) "ihterest" neons t\e rala ol interest paloble by the Pronoter or the ollo ee os the tuse noy be Erptonouoi- -For the purple ol this douv (t) the rate ol inte.est chrrgeoble lion the olottee bJ the pronot4L in cose ol deloutt, shotl be equot to the rcre ol interest qhich the prcnote. sholl be liahle to pay the alottee, in cae ol d{oult; fu) the intercst pdyabte b! the pramoter to the ollouee shotl be hon the dotc the ptonoLa rcceived the ohoLnt o. anv porttherafnll the dote the anount or pott theteof ohd intcrest ther@n is refunded, and the inerest polable b! the ollottee to the pronoter shatl be lton the dqte the lUottee deloults in pavnent to the pronoterti the dota t is Paiilf 28.'l'herefore,interestonthedelaypoymentifromthecomplainantshallbecharged complalntNo.7933ot2022 AI t:y GR URU ar the prescribed rirte ie., 11.100/o by the respondcnt/promoter whicl is the srrrre as is being grantcd to dre complainant rn case of delaved possession On considerntron of the documents available on record and submissions made by both thc parties, the authority is satisficd that the respondent is in contravention of the Section 11(41[a) ofthe Act by not handing over possession by the due date as per the agree ent.

By virtue ofclause 1(ivl oithe AtTo'dable tlousing Policy,2013, the respondenl/promoter shallbe necessar,ly required to .onrplete the construction ofthe projectwithin 4 years fronl the date olapproval ol building plans or grant of environmental clearance, whichever is later' 'lhcreibre, in vieu'oithe findings given above, the due date of handing ovcr of possession was 30.05.2022.

0.05.2022.

However, the respondent has lailed to handover possession ofthe subject apartment ro the complainant tillthe date ofthis ordcr' Accordingly, it is the lailure olthe respondent/promoter to fulfilits obliSations an(l responsibilities as Per the agreement to hand overthe possession within the stipulaled peiod. |urther, there is no document available on record to suhstantiste the claim ot the respondenl.

Accordingly, the claim of the Pagc 3s oi44 compLaln!No.7933of 2022 respondent is reiected being devoid olmerits.

Moreover, the authority observes that tbere is no document on record from which it can be ascertained as to whether thc respondent has applied lor occupation certilicate or what is the status olconstruction of the project.

Hence, this project is to be treated as on goi.g project and the provisions of the Act shall be applicable equally to ore builder as well as allottees. :10. r\c.o ingly, the non'comphancc ol the nrandate cont.lined in section 11(41(al rcad with proviso to section 18(11 of the Act on the part of the resPondent is cstab lished As such, the a llottee sh all be paid, by the p romoter, inte.est for every nronth of delay irom dlle date of possession i.e, 30.05.2022 till valid olfer of poss.ssion plus 2 monlhs after obtaining occupation certjficaie from lhe conrpetent authority or actual handing over of possession whichever is earlier, rr per section 18[] ) ofthe Act o12016 read with rule 15 ofthe rules' :11.

Further, as per section 11(4)(D and section 17[1] or the Act of 2016, the ptu,rroler is under an obligation to 8et the conveyance deed executed in favour .f the comphinant. whereas as per section 19(11) ofthe Actoi2016, the allottee is rlso obligated b participate tpwards r€Sistration olthe coDvevance dced oi thc unit in qucstion.

However, there is nothing on the rccord to show that thc respo.dent has applied for occ pation ceruncate or whai is the status ol ihe d..rloDmenl ol the rbove'menlioned project ln view of lhe above rhe r. ove rhe r.lndndent rc d.recled lo handover po(ses'ron ol lhe nar/unrt and execurP conveyance deed in favourolthe complainant in terms ofsection 17[1] oithe Act oI2016 on payment of stamp duty and regrstratiotr charges as applicable, within three months aftcr obtaioing occupation certificate from the competcnt C.lll To restrain the respondent from terminatingthe unit tillthe Iinal disposal ofthe present .o D Plai nt complain!No,7983oI2022 i!ith delay possession charges and the authority bas already deliberatcd the same in the irndings w.r.t. relief no.

1 & 2 in the above paragraphs accordingly. rn view ofthe same the present relielstands redundant. c,lv To appoint a local commission.r to cafy out the tasks as mentioned in para 34 ofthe comPlai!t, C,V To condu.t a forensic audit of thc books ofa.counts of the respond.nt as per taskmentioned io para 35 olthe complaint, C.VI To tak€ a.tion lorviolation olscction 6, i.€, non_extenslon ofregistmtion c,vll Direct the respondent to prcvide on amdavit, a date tillwhicha valid of,er of possessioD shall be given lfthe respondent fails to Provide the samc, penat procccdinss for violation of section 4(Z)(l)(c) be initiated against the respondcnt, :Jil l'h! complain.rnt has soughl so re othcr reliets such as apporntment ol LC. conduct tbrcnsic audit olthe books ofaccouDts oathe respondent, initiation ot p.nrl proceedings tbr violation of Sectjon 4(2)(ll[c], Section 6 ol the Act, 2016 elc 'l'he Authoriq obscrves that duc to several continuing violations of the provisions of thc Act, 2016 by the respondent, the Authority has alreadv taken Suo nrotu cognizance oltheprojectvide complaintbeathgna- REM'GRG'1087' 202.l.rnd fi cezerl rhe bank a.count ofthe .espondent related to the project vid' or.lcr.lated 24 02.2023 lherelore, the nuthority is proceeding to decide only ihc m. nly ihc m.rn reLief solrght by the conrplainanL ir) thc prcseni comPla,nt ie', dclav irossession charges, possession and execution olconvevance deed on the basis o1 (iocum€nls available on record as wellas submission made by the partics c.vlll Direct th e respo ndent to provi de a valid physica I possessiod after rcceipt oa oc.upancy certilicate. :14 lhc rcspondent is legally bound lo meet the pre_rcquisites ior obt ning oc.upahon certificate from the competent authority lt is unsatjated that even aitrr the lapse oa morc than 2 ycars lronr the due datc ol possession the rcspondent has hiled to complete rhc construclion !nd apply lor 0C to the :42 Ihe complainant in the present rnatter is seeking possession of the unit along Com!laint No.

7983 of 2022 (s.

HARERI I com'rainr No.7eo3 or2022 db c tnucnnu I "nd ro'+-' competent author,ty.

The prornoler is duty bound to obtain OC and hand over possession only alter obtaining oC c,lx Direct thc respondent to refund the excess amount paid by the (omplainant over rnd above thc lotal salc Pri(e.

As per clause 4.1 ofthe buyer's agreement the sale consideration/sale price oi l{s 26,29,500/- shall be payable as Per the payment pl.rn annexed as annexure- Il, GS'I, service Tax, VAT, and other levies, duty iiaPplicrble shall be pavable by the nllottee ovcr and above the sale consideration |urther, it was also aCreed thc service tax/vAT and other applicable taxes and charges ol aDy nature wh.rtsoever, whjch may be levied by the Covernment Autborities with prospective and rstrospective sffect shall be Payable by the allottee over and ibovp sale.onsideration mentioned herein above.

The relevant clause 4.1 olthe IIUA rs reproduceherein belowl ARTICI,E4 SALE CONSIDERATION l.l Sale Price 't hat th. alkntuc dltrees b Pa! tlre Lanlr! for the poehae ofthe soid llot/ uht a em af RS.26,29,SOO/ odneosuring 64s sq lt (.olculdted @ Rs.l,oOO/- per sq, ft ol .d.pet areo oI the soid unit' o.tneosuring 99 sq' JL and botconr a.eo . onr a.eo .okuloftn @ Re5o0/' per sq.

JL ottdched with the ltat ddneosurins ..-........... . sq. lL), (hereinolter refefre.t to as "sote Price/Sale .onndsation") sho be pavoble os per the pavtuent plan onnexed os 'Annerure B (heteinoJter relerred ds "patnent plan") C,S.T,Senice tu), VAT onv othet levies.lutv it apPlicable sho be pavobte bv the allotee oeer tud obove the sole consi.lerotion EDC sholl be t;oldbk at pa the soitl potit!

1 he two wheeler pa.king shall be benttted ahd atk\ oted b! the conpon! ot the tine of hahdihg aeu af po$e$ion of the unit t. rt.,4Itoiee Theset etot/vttondottothc.opplicoble toxesondcharyes afun| notutc \|hutsa.ve., $htcn no! be \ew1l h! the Cavt autha'itv wth pt..ifiM @t1 , rrcspediv. tlle,.t shatt he p.vdble b! tlt nllattee avet ond dbare5nle.anetletorio n!rtlar)ed hctcin ahnve ln vrew olthe above clause, the Authority observes that the sale consideration is exclusive ot GST, Service Tax, VAT, and other levies, duty ifapplicable and the ri'spondent rs ircll within right lo claim such amount as agreed between the parties and the same shall be pa)'able by the allottec over and above the sale 35.

36 ComplarntNo.7983ol2022 -@-, GURUGRA[/ consideration.

Holvever, the respondent is directed to Furnish the details of payment of such taxes pa,d to the concerned Authorty.

Il the respondent /promoter fa,led to provide the details oftaxes as wellas applicable charges as per the law ofland theD the respondent shall refund the exc€ss amount. c.x Dlrect the respondert to Sive bitu.catioD of the total sale P.ice ircludlng the .larilication ofcost of parking uDd.r the Affordable HouslDg Policy, 2013, c,xl To restraitr the respondeni from dema.dingcarparkingchargesf.onr the complai.a!ts. :17.

Since, the said project is the affordable housing project and as per the latest amendment dated 04.01.2021 in the said Policy 2013, which ,t,s reproduce as under! ,l- Th. .lau!: no 4(jt, oI ttE ,llla loble ttausins PoliL! ddt.l lgthAusutt, 20t.1 . t, 20t.1 .eloLel to potkitg norntshallbe subnituted wth the Jolbwnlq! ''4(iii) Parking Noms: o Mandoton, non charjeable a s ECSparktns space L Mnndotory porkins tp.e o t the.ate ol haf F.quiva lent Cur Spoce (Ecs) ln. eoch dwelhns u ntt !1ul I be rovidca ti ottlr on? twa-eheel.t parkino lte sholl bt e.rtnatked Iot eoch ltat, ||nrh.hdttbc alL,actl ant! u) the llot ownes lhe @rking bdyof[!. ||heelett sha be Aj,tnr2 5n) Lnlcss othet||ise sP..ifcd in thezohtn! l'he baluh.e a@iloble porkns space, ilon!, beyanll the ollocoted Na \lheeter potkno ntes, cuh be eoma.ked o! lree vkitor co.-porktn! b Optionol antl chorqea\le potkinlt tpace ot the nte of0 5 ECS per dwelhnll t The colanzer nlay p.otde on oddltiohol on.l optionol parking spoce naximutu ta rhe e$ent ot hotl Equivolent cat space (Ecs) per dwettthg unit ii. /n .ore srcl oprionol Porking sPoce is ptovidcd b! the coloniset naxinum olane.ot Patkinll spoce per Awelhns uhncan be ollotted bv Lhe eot.hse. at o .aLe not etdedtne s% ol dlc cost of llot to \t.h t tt coses wherc lrcenset uhtler AtlP 2A13 ohead! stand gronted ond huildn! plahs stond aPprcvedwnhauLavotlns the optianol0.S ECSper dwelhhg u it parktn! \poce, the calanser shotl be rcquired to subnrt thP.n- t ol,t o.

F\atu,f ott\,a|ta-a" section 14 ol Reol Ln.Le [Regutati.n and Deveh+n)ent) Acr 2016 lot L hc wr p ose ol u atentl n)c n t in b u nd i n I Pt a n s lor ovo I h h! sLch odaiti on a t Complaint No.

7983 of 2022 GURUGRAlr/ ond opti.not a.s ECS per d||eltikg rnit potking space.

Furthet, this benelt 5hall not he avail.ble fa. the p tects whe.ein oc.upattan .ettili.ot aloltthe tc tcnLiot bdett harohtodt, been obtained ii.

Addttlanol parkrlu natD6and pdnncte\,ildnr, con bespecifed inrtre zontngplan" :lU. ln vierv ofthe above provisions, the respondeDt/promoter js bound to comply the terms and condition of the Afordable Group Housing Policy, 2013 accordingly, no direction w.r.t. the same cnn be delibera(ed by the autho. the autho.ity at C,Xll Direct the respondent to give anti.profiteering .redi t/input tax credit to the compl.inants. ll.l. l'he complainant has sought the relief with regard to direct the respondent to gi!c aD n -prolteen ng credit/nrput tax cred it to the complar nants and charg. th.

CSI as per rulesand regulations, the attention of the au tho rity was d rawn to the fact thatthe legislature while framing the GST law specifically provided for ant! proilteering nreasures as a chc.k and to maintain the balance in the,nflntion ol cost or the product/services dLre to change in migrat'on to a new tax regime i.e. r,:i. bv r.o,oorJIIA \pcrion 17. in C"nlral Coods dnd Servrces Tdx A.l. l'l-, HJrtJn.rCouds,noServrLtsTd\Acl.20l7.lhe\dnrei\reproduredhFrern 'Settnn 171 (1) Any redrLlatl rl.ate oltax oh on! supPt olgooAs or serri.ct or the benefir ol inpur tot 4redn thallbe posed on ta tlE.eciptent brwot al .arnnensurate reductian in pt tces " As pff the above provision, the benefit of tar< reduction or'lnput Tax Credit'is rcquired to be passed onto the customers in view ofsection 171ofHGST/CCST Ad, 2017.

In the event, the respondent/pronotcr has not passed th€ benefit of IIC to the buyers ofthe unit in contravention to the provisions ofsection 171(1) olrhe HGST Act,2017.

The allottee is at libertyto approach the State Screening Co m m ittee H aryana lor initiatine proceedings u nder section 171 of the HGSl Act .rg.rnst the respondent.promoter.

LO CofrplaintNo,7983oI2022 E HARERH GURUGRAN/ G,xlll To restrain the respondent from charging any brintenarce charges in future as the complainant is not bound to pry the same utrdcr thc Afiordable Housing Po licy, 2013.

As p er th e clarification regarding maintenance charges to be levied on affordable strNp housing projects being given by D'lCP, Haryana vide clarification no.

PF- 2i Al)02+/3676 dateLl31.01 2024, it rs very clcarly mentioned that the uijliry clr!rges (whrch includes electricity bill, wat. bill, wat.r bill, property tax waste coLlection chalges or any repair inside the individual flat etc.) can be charged trom the .rLlottees as per consumptions.

Accordingly, the respondent is directed to charge the nraintenance/use /utility charges from the complainants allottees as pe. consunrpiioDs basis as hrs been clarilied by the Directorate of l'own and Country PlanniDg, Haryana vide .1,ILf ication dated 31.01.2024. c.xl o restrain the respondent from demandirg Labour Cess, vAT, work contEct Tax rnd Powcr tlackupcharges 'l'h. complainant lus soueht dle reliel to restrain lhe respondent liom dcnianding l-abourCess, VA1, W[T and power backup charges.

Although, as per rc.ord. no demand under the above said heads have been made bv the respondeni tilldate, houever in clause 4 9 (iiil and (ivl olthe buvels agre.mcnt .ht.d 17.06.2017. it has been nrentioned that thc allottee is liable to pay , I ,-drely Ih" above s"rd chdr8ds rs per the demand. rdi\"d bv the respo ,J''nr conrpany.

Iherefore, in the interest ofjustice and to avoid lurther litigation, the A(lhority is deliberating its tindings on the above sard charges .

Labour Cessr- l'he l.abour cess is levicd (O 1% on ihe cost ofconshu.tion incurred by an employer as per the provisions of sections 3[1) and 3{3] ol the Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare CessAct, 1996 read with Notiilcation No.

S.o 2899 dirted 26.9.1996.

It is lcvied and collected on tlre cost oiconstruction incurred by employers including contracto.s under specilic conditions.

Moreovcr, this issue has already been dealtwith bv the 4t_ +2.

43.

Complain!No 79a3 oi2022 FIAAFA I c,mo"nrNo 7esro,:,rr -- ?lJ:)A',' c-o roorhr' authority in conplaint bearing no.

962 o12019 trtled i4r' Sumit (umor CuptaandAnr.Vs SepsetPrcperties Privote Limitedwherein it was hcld thatsincelabourcess is to be paid by the respondent, as such no labour cess should be separately charged by the respondent. espondent.

The authority is ot the !iew thal the allottee is neither an employer nor a contractor and labour cess is not a tax but a iee.

Thus, the demard oflabour cess raised upon the complajnants is completely arbitrary and the complainants cannot be nrade liable to pay aDy labour cess to the respondent and it ,s the respondent builder who is solely responsible [or the disbursenrent ofsaid amount VAT|- 1'hc promoter is entrtlcd to charge VA'l' from the allottees wherc thc same was leviable, at the applicable rate, if they have not opted for composition schenre.

However, ifcomposition scheme has been availed, no VA'l' is leviable.

Further, the promoter shall charge actual VAT fronr thc ,rllott.cs/prospective buyeB paid by the promoter to the concerned departmcnt/authority on p!o-ratabasis i.e. depending upon thearea ofthe ilat allotted to the complaihant vis' i'vis the total area ol the particuldr proiect. llowever, the complainnnt would also be entitled to prooF of ch pnyme ts to the concerned dcPartment along with a computxtior proportionate io the allotted unrt, before making payment under the w'fc (work contract tax):.

The comPlaiDant is seeking above mentioned rclief with respect to restrninrng thc respondcnt fiom demanding lvork Contract Tax.

At this stagc, it is important to stress upon the definiiion ot term 'work contract' under Section 2[119] of the CCST Act, 2017 and the snme is reproduced below lor ready relerence: 'ttte) MtiJ tttttlt r)cdr, t t.nno.t lnt bu)khrs .onst u.nar.

I o b nL o t bn,. n n p I c t b n, e tt.t )trt, I nsto I I utl on l itn nlt a ra tnpt ove nent:, tnodilica on, t.t).it, Dnnten.h.e, refuwtrnn, altcrction .t Gi]RUGRAN/ Complaint No.

7983 of 2022 conmklioning alon! in,n.vabk prcpe.ry ||hercin tonsler olptop r n loat1s (\!hethe. a: !a.d: ot' th \one othct lato)) n tnvolved in the executor ol tuch. r ol tuch.onttn,' After considering the above, the Authority is of the view that the complainant/allottee is neitheran employernor a contractorand the sa'ne is notapplicable in the p resen t case.

Th us, the complainant /allottee can not be nradc liablc to pay the srnre to the respoDdent. .

Power Aackup Chargesr-'lhe issue ofpower back-up charges has already been clarified by the office of DTCP, Haryana vjde offlce order dated :11.01.2024 wherein it has categorically cla r ifi ed the nlandatory se.vices to bc provided by lhe coloni,erldevelope. in altordable grouP housins colonics and services for which maintenance charges can be charged from the allottees as per.onsumption.

According, the promoter can only charge Draintcnance/use/utility charges from the conrplainant_allottees as per consumption as prescribed in category-ll ol thc office order di(e(l 31.01.2024. ll.

Dircctions ofthe authorlty '1,1. llcnce, the authority hereby passes this orderand issue the lollowing directro ns un(ler section 37 olthe Act to en re compliance ofobligrtions pronrorer as per the functions edtrusted to the authority under section 34t0 of The respondent/promoier iF directed to iray ihterest to th€ complainant(sl against the paid-up amount at the prescribed rate of 11.10% p.a. for every month of delay from the dlre date oi possession i e., 30.05 2022 till val,d offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authfrity or actual handing over of possession, which€ver is earlier, as per section 18(1) of the Act o12016 r€ad with rule ii.

The arrears ofsuch interesl accrued from 30.05.2022 tillthe date oforder by the authority shall be poid by the promoter to the allottee(s) within a ComplaintNo, 7983of 2022 GURUGRAIT/ .RER (Asb6k s period oi90 days from date of this order and irterest ior every month of delay shall be paid by the pronrote. to th. allortee(s) before 1oth ol th. subsequcnl month as per rule 16(2) olrhe rules. iii. ules. iii. 'lhe respondent/promoter shall handover possession of the flat/unit and executc conveyance deed in favourolthe complajnantIs) in terms ofsection 17(11 olthe Act of 2016 orr payment ofstamp duty an.l registrarion charSes rs applicable, within three months 3fter obtaining occupation cerrrficrre lrom the competent authority. iv 'l'he complainant[s) are directed to pay outstaDding dues, if any, after .rdjustm.nt oiinterest for the delayed period. v. 'lhe respondent/promoter shall not charge anything fronr rhe conrplainant(sl lvhich is not dre part ofthe Alfordable Housing Policy,2013. v i 'lh e rate of inte.est chargcab le from the allottee[s) by rhe promoter, i n case ol defauh shall be charged at the presc.ibed ratc i.e., 11.100/0 by the respondent/promoter whiah is the same rate of interest whrch the promotcr slrall be liable to pay the allottee(s), in case of default i.e., ihe delayed possessiou char8es as pcr section 2(zal of the r\ct. .15.-l'hi5decjsionshallInutatismut.tndisrpplytocasesmcntionedinpara3ofthrs ordcr where'n details oipaid up amount is mentioned in each ofthe complaints .14,. (lorrplaint ns wellrs applications, iiany, stand disposed offaccordingly. '17. fihs be consigned to regrstry.

Y.r--+-) lviiay KtK coyat) -{.'^' (Arun Kumar) Estate Regulatory Authorityi Gurugram Haryana Real Dated:1n012025