RAJAT JAIN vs NINANIYA ESTATE LTD

ITHARER'. #, eunuenavr BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGU GURUGMM Compla t No.

5948 of 2022 & others NAME OF THE BUILDER PROIECT NAME M/S NINANIYA ESTA Prism Portico Case No. cR/5948/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd. cR/5952/2022 cR/5957 /2022 Rajat,ain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Sh.

Animesh Goyal Sh.

Vijender Parmar Sh.

Animesh Coyal Sh.

Vijender Parmar cR/5963/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Nirlaniya Estates Ltd.

CR/5964/2022 Rajar,ain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd. a-TcRtsrrB/ron Rajat.Jain V/S Nlnaniya Estates Ltd. cR/5987/2022 Rajat Iain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd. cR/5982/2022 Rajat,ain V/S Ninaniya Estares Ltd. cR/s983/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd. cR/5984/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Rajat,ain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

TORYAUTHORITY, cR/5989 /2022 Date of sion: 16.08.2024 S LTD.

Vijender Parmar cR/5990/2022 cR/6001,/2022 1.2 Page 1of26 S.

No.

Case title Appearance 2 3 4 5 7 B 9 Sh.

Viiender Parmar 10 Sh.

Viiender Parmar 11 13 * HARER;. # eunGnnu Complai t No.

5948 of 2022 & others Sh.

Vijender Parmar 74 cR/6002/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 15 cR/6020/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 76 cR/6027/2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 17 cR/6025 /2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 18 cR/6026/2022 Rajat lain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 19 cR/6027 /2022 Sh.

Vijender Parmar 20 cR/ 6622 /2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 27 cR/6662/2022 Sh.

2/2022 Sh.

Vijender Parmar 22 cR/6689 /2022 Rajat lain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Vijender Parmar 23 cR/ 6691 / 2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

Viiender Parmar COMM; Shri Sanjeev Kumar Arora ORDER 1.

This order shall dispose ofthe twenty three (23) cr filed before this authority under section 31 of the R and Development) Act,2016 (hereinafter referred e rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and 2017 [hereinafter referred as "the rules") for violati of the Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed that I Member mplaints titled abov lal Estate (Regulatio s "the Act") read wit Development) Rule ln ofsection 11(4)[z he promoter shall b Page 2 of VE on ith es, .a) be 26 Rajat lain V/S I Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd 2.

3. * HARER,i # eunuenal,r responsible for all its obligations, responsibilities and functions to the allottees as per the agreement for sale executed int se between parties.

The core issues emanating from them are simil r in nature and the complainant[s) in the above referred matters are ottees of the proiect, namely, Prism Portico situated at Sector-89, Guru by the same respondent/promoter i.e., M/S Nina terms and conditions ofthe application form fulcru am being developed iya Estates Ltd.

The ofthe issue involved promoter to deliver Complai t No.5948 of2022 & others Project Name and Location "Prism Portico" at sector Project area DTCP License No.

NA NA Due date ofpossession: NA Occupation certificate: Not obtained Offer ofpossession: Not offered Unit Unit No. admeasu in all these cases pertains to failure on the part of timely possession of the units in question, seeking The details of the complaints, reply status, unit n ., date of agreement, possession clause, due date of possession, total consideration, total paid amount, and reliefsought are given in the tabl below: , Gurgaon, Haryana. fund of the unit.

Rera Registered Possession clausei NA Not Regis Sr.

Regis Sr.

No Complaint No., Case Tide, and Date of filirg of complaint Total Sale Consider ation / Total paid by the Relief Sought Page 3 of 26 HARERA GURUGRAM Complai t No.5948 of2022 & others complain ant 1. cR/s948/ 2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply statusi t8.04.202 4 672 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 NA N TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

B,93,077 Refund z. cR/sesz / 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply statusr 78.04.202 4 602 H, GL 550 sq. ft.

NA A \M TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,0L7 Refund ETT 3Rl 3. cR/s9s7 / Rajat Jain V/S 523 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: NA TSC: - NA Refund Page 4 of 26 IABERA GURUGRAM Complai t No.5948 of2022 & others Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04.202 4 xsi 02.04.20 13 BL}.

AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 4. cR/s963/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOFI 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04.202 4 508 L-T #q 550 s( ft. u '{l l.

Payment receipt: NA h ,,y TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 Refund ffi {di :R il 13 5. cR/s964/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 510 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 NA TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 Refund Page 5 of 26 IiABEM GURUGRAM Complair t No.

5948 0f2022 & others Reply status: 74.04.202 4 6. cR/s978/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04.202 4 527 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipti 02.04.20 13 NA TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,017 Refund 7. cR/seBl/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply statusi 78.04.202 4 H, GL 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 NA A \M TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

4,93,017 Refund 8. cR/s982/ 2022 519 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receiDt: NA TSC: - NA Refund Page 6 of26 HARERA GURUGRAI/ Complail t No.

5948 of 2022 & others Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 74.04.202 4 02.04.20 13 AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 9. cR/s983/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04. us: 18.04.202 4 518 Hr ']: IA ravment A TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 Refund reieipt: 02.04.20 73 10. cR/5984/ 2022 Rajat lain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 577 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 NA TSC: NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,077 Refund Page 7 of 26 NA I1ABEBA GURUGRAIM Complair l No.

5948 0f2022 & others Reply statusr 78.04.202 4 11. cR/seqg / 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 78.04.202 4 516 550 sq, ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 NA N i3} TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

4,93,077 Refund 12. cR/see0/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04.202 4 H", GL ryR r8u( receipt: 02.04.20 13 NA TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,01,7 Refund 13. cR/600t/ 2022 572 550 sq. ft.

NA NA TSC: - NA Refund Page B of 26 550 sq.

NA I HARERA GURUGRAM Complair ; No.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 18.04.202 4 Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 AP:- Rs.

8,93,01,7 74. cR/6002 / 2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 Reply status: 78.04.202 4 511 H", sso sq. i I fr. ilr ,IA A TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

B,93,077 Refund G TR receipt: 02.04.20 73 15. cR/6020 / Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOFI 09.09.202 2 507 550 sq. ft.

8,93,077 Refund Page 9 of26 HARERA GURUG|]AM Complair I No.

5948 of2022 & others Reply status: 78.04.202 4 16. cR/ 6021/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 78.04.202 4 506 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receiptl 02.04.20 13 NA h TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,0r7 Refund .s 17. cR/ 6025 / Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: t8.04.202 4 H, GL 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04 20 13 NA A \M TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,017 Refund 18. cR/ 60261 2022 615 550 sq. ft.

NA NA TSC: - NA Refund Page 10 of26 HARERA GURUGRAM Complair : No.

5948 of 2022 & others Raiat lain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: L4.04. us: L4.04.202 4 Payment receipt: 02.Q4.20 13 AP:- Rs.

8,93,017 19. cR/6027 / 2022 Rajat,ain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 74.04.202 4 502 H, 6t ,l RG {K NA NA A TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,017 Refund cR/6622/ 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 524 550 sq. ft.

I,93,077 Refund Page 11 of 26 550 sq. ft.

HARERA GURUGRAII No.

5948 of 2022 & others Reply status: 78.04.202 4 TSC: - NA AP:- Rs.

8,93,017 Refund cR/ 6662 / 2022 Rajat Jain v/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: \8.04.202 4 550 sq. ft.

NA Payment receipt: 02.04.20 Refund TSC: - NA AP:- Rs. a,93,077 cR/6689 / 2022 Rajat Jain V/S Ninaniya Estates Ltd.

DOF: 09.09.202 Reply status: t8.04.202 4 H Gl NU Page 12 of 26 NA NA 550 sq. ft. ll^ lPa),rnent lrecerpt: 02 04 20 23.

I CRl66e1l I s22 2022 I 550 sq. ft.

NA NA Refund 4.

5.

HARERA GURUG[?AN4 It has been decid compliance of /respondent in authority to ensure the allotteefsJ and the real regulations made thereu The facts of all the comp application for non- of the promoter mandates the upon the promoters, under the the rules and the s)/allottee(s) are similar.

Out of of lead case CR/5948/2022 Rajatlain V/S Ninaniya Estates are being taken into consideration for determining the rights of the all the amount paid. s) qua refund of No.

DOF: 09.09.202 2 Reply status: 74.04.202 4 Payment receipt: 02.04.20 13 AP:- Rs.

4,93,017 Note: ln the table referred above foUows: Abbreviation Full form TSC Total Sale consideration They are elaborated as ?-iqfs c{i A.

Proiect and unit related details PaEe 13 of 26 ffi HARERA ffieunuennlrr 6.

The particulars ofthe project, the details ofsale con eration, the amount paid by the complainant(s), date ofproposed handin over the possession, delay period, if any, have been detailed in the foll tabular form: CR/5948/2022 Rajat Jain v/S Ninaniya tes Ltd.

Complai No. omplai No.

5948 of 2022 & others Name and location of the proiect "Prism Portico Executi Pataudi Road, Guru RERA Registered/ not registered Not Registered Date of agreement to sell Not executed Payment receipt dated 02.04.20L3 (page no.

17 of complai 6L2 fpage no.

17 of complai Unit area admeasuring 550 sq. ft.

Possession clause Due date of possession Total sale consideration Amount paid by the complainant Rs.8,93,017l- (as alleged by complai Reminders 07.04.20t6, 04.06.20 16 [Page no.

18-19 ofreply Page 14 of 26 Details llnit no. * HARERH ffieunuerw t2.

Cancellation letter 02.07.2.016 (page no.

17 of replyJ B.

Facts ofthe complaint The complainant has made the following submissions the complaint; - 7.

That the respondent specifically stated that the pos ssion of the unit shall be delivered within 3 months of signing of the ment to sell.

The property dealers/agents hired by the respondent fo marketing the project approached the complainant for booking a commer of the respondent showing them the rosy pictures.

8.

That the application form for booking the said ial suite in the project submitted and the respondent allotted apartment no Situated at Sector-89, Pataudi Road, Gurugram i respondent did not issue any allotment letter requests made by the complainant for issuance o complainant deposited a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- 02,04.2073 to the respondent.

9.

That the complainant further deposited a sum of Rs ,93,0t7 /- the complainant deposited a total sum of Rs respondent.

B,e3,01.7 /- mmercial suite was 612, in Prism Portico, the year 2013, but espite being several allotment letter.

Thc vide receipt dated in this way with the 10.

That at the time ofissuance ofreceipt dated 02.04.2 1.3 of initial payment, the complainant was apprised that the possession I the unit complete in within a period of 36 Complai No. omplai No.5948 of2022 & others Occupation certificate Not obtained Offer of possession Not offered all respect would be handed over to the complainan Page 15 of26 ffiHARERA ffi eTuennH,l months from the date of issuance of receipt.

The lt. that the respondent would also execute a regular bu with the complainant with respect to the allotted uni That however the respondent never came forward builder buyer agreement of the allotted unit with after receiving huge amount as part sale conside repeated request to execute builder buyer agreem 12.

That however the respondent miserably failed to co the agreed time and also failed to handover the causing tremendous pressure upon the compla performing its part of the obligations illegally pressurized the complainant to make further p execution of the regular builder buyer agreement.

13.

That looking into the fact that there was no develo even no construction work has started yet, the com the project.

Hence, the complainant s requesting fo paid by him.

C.

Relief sought by the complainant - 14.

The complainant has sought following relief(s): I.

Direct the respondent to refund an amount p to the respondent i.e., Rs.8,93,017/- along wi from the date of payment till actual realizatio On the date of hearing, the authority explain promoter about the contraventions as alleged to 15. relation to section 11( l [a) ofthe act to plead guil Page 16 of 26 Complai No.

5948 of 2022 & others pondent also assured lder buyer agreement in due course of time. execute the regular he complainant even tion despite making plete the unit within ssession of the same ant and instead of and unauthorizedly yment even without ment on the spot and lainant lost in trust in refund of the amount d by the complainant interest @ 18olo p.a. of the said amount. to the respondent/ e been committed in or not to plead guilty. ffiIAREIA P- eunuenRvr D.

Reply by the respondent.

16. ndent.

16.

That the present complaint is not maintainable Authority under the Real Estate (Regulation and D (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) and (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017, (hereina Rules"J.

17.

That the complainant is also liallgfqthe concealme the Hon'ble Authority, as it has failed to disclose th who has not fulfilled his obligations and duties as under the Act and has not paid the sale considerati at the time of booking of the said unit.

Therefore th liable to be dismissed on this ground alone.

18.

79.

That the complainant is estopped by his own acts, laches, omissions etc. from filing the present compla That evidently the booking of the said unit was done the year 2012 i.e. much prior to the enactment of RE much prior to the constitution of this Hon'ble Auth present transaction as alleged in the present compl closed prior to the enactment of RERA Act, 2016 and Authority cannot legally apply the provisions ofthe present transaction as the same shall amount th, judicial powers into the field of legislature. [t is to cancellation letter ofthe unit involved in the present issued on 02.07.201.6 i.e. prior to the enactment an Act, 2016, hence adjudication of the present com Page 17 of26 Complai No.5948 of2022 & others before this Hon'ble lopmentJ Act,2076 Harvana Real Estate r referred to as "the t of material fact from it is the complainant n allottee as defined as promised by him present complaint is nduct, acquiescence, nt. the complainant in Act, 2016 and also ity and therefore the t was initiated and erefore, this Hon'ble RA Act, 2 016 on the transgressions of its e noted here that the mplaint was already enforcement of RERA laint bv this Hon'ble I ffH r&&, I - ARERA URUGRAII Authority shall amount to the retrospective applicaqion of the substantive law, which otherwise is not allowed in the eyes of lafv and will not sustain the scrutiny ofcourts as well as principle of natural j[rstice.

20. stice.

20.

That respondent had requested the complainant to make the further payment after the booking amount towards the sal! consideration of said unit on 16.04.20 14,07.04.2016 and 08.06.2016 by sending the demand letter to the complainant.

However, the comelainan! failed to comply with the said demand letters by makirg the paymeht towards the sale consideration of said unit.

Therefore, the complaina[rt is now estopped as per the principal ofestopple from filing the present c{mplaint being himself in default in the present complaidt is li.able to be disr]nissed.

21.

That as per the settled law, the booking amount tolrr'ards the said unit is liable to be forfeited by the respondent due to the continuous and persistent default committed by the complainant in adherence to the schedule of payment of the sale consideration to\ fards the said unit as agreed by the complainant and therefore the complainant is now barred by law to claim any refund of the said amou nt wh ich has already been forfeited by the respondent after giving due notice and opportunity to the complainant for the payment of sale consideratiof.

Hence, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on the sole grounI only.

22.

That the present complaint is also liable to be dismis$ed on the ground that prior to the filing of this complaint, the complainant] never raised or made any demand for the refund of the said amount, w}iich is the mandatory requirement before filing the present complaint for the refund of booking amount.

23.

That the complainant does not come and fall in the dategory ofthe allottee Complainf No.

5948 of 2022 & others Page 18 of 26 HARERA M"GURUGRAI/ as defined section 2 (d) of RERA Act, as the complai booking of said unit for his own use or for his pers invested the booking amount, in the said project, onl the commercial site by using the brand name of the it further for the margins. e margins.

However, looking at the the country at that particular point of time, it was decided not to go ahead with the said project of t making any further payment towards the sale consi 24.

That the complainant be treated as 'Co-Promoter' a as the complainant has invested in the project just selling the commercial units.

The sole motive of make profits from the project by the way of assured It was the complainant who defaulted and endan the respondent by not making further payment for excuse of delay in construction and it is the comp severe monitory loss and damage to the respondent forced to find out the alternate buyers of the said u market price and rates due to such breach co 26. that the complainant booked 23 units in one go only huge profits considering the opportunity of the futu the intention to be the "allottee" in the said proj units for his own use and therefore, it was n complainant to took the physical possession of the was always his plan iust to invest the booking amou re-selling it further, even before the completion ofth situation.

However, the plans of the complaina Page 19 of 26 No.5948 of2022 & others ant did not make the nal purpose, but just four making profit in ndent by selling nomic slowdown in e complainant who e respondent by not ration. d not as an 'Allottee', earn profits from re- complainant was to turns scheme. d the entire proiect of e said unit using the nant who has caused the respondent was its in urgency on less by the complainant. th an intent to earn and in fact never had by using this said 23 er the intention of ompleted units and it t and earn margins by prorect as per market t failed due to the RA RA[/ HARE GURUG slowdown in the market and the complainant finall from the proiect.

27 .

That the present complaint is barred by limitation alleged that the booking ofthe said unitwas done in alleged possession of the unit was to be given not la and therefore cause of action, if any, accrued in favo in October 20LZ and any alleg any alleged refund that was complainant, that was legally allowed within the limitation of up to 3 years i.e. maximum till 2015.

Th limitation period for filing the legal proceeding has even before the constitution of this Hon'ble Authori 28.

Copies of all the relevant documents have been record.

Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, decided on the basis of these undisputed documen by the parties.

Jurisdiction of the authority 29.'Ihe authority observes that it has territorial as jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint below.

E.l Territorial iurisd iction 30.

As per notification no.

1/92/2077-7TCP dated 74.7 and Country Planning Department, the jurisdi Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gu purpose with offices situated in Gurugram.

In the p in question is situated within the planning area E.

Complain No.

5948 of 2022 & others decided to run away The complainant has e 16.07.2012 and the r than October, 2015 r of the complainants to be claimed by the prescribed period of fore the prescribed already been expired d and placed on the the complaint can be and submission made ell as subiect matter reasons given r the .2017issued by Town on of Real Estate am District for all esent case, the project of Gurugram District.

Page 20 of26 HARERA 31. ffi"GURUGRAI\4 stage.

32.

33.

5948 of 2022 & others Therefore, this authority has complete territorial ju the present complaint.

E.tl Subiect matter ,urisdiction Section 11[4)(a) of the Act, responsible to the allottee as reproduced as hereunder: Section 77 [4) The promoter sholl' 2016 provides that t per agreement for (o) be responsible for all obligations, responsibiliti under the provisions of this Act or the rules and associatian ofollottees, as the t isdiction to deal with promoter shall be Section 11[4)[a) is and functions ulotions made sale, or to the nce of all the allottees, or the authority, iew of the judgement ters ond Developers reiterated in case of obligations cost ts under this So, in v s So, in view of the provisions of the Act quoted ab ve, the authority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint re ing non-compliance of obligations by the promoter leaving aside compe ation which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by the omplainants at a later Further, the authority has no hitch in proceeding wi h the complaint and to apartments, plots or buildings,asthe case moy be, to t common qreas to the association ofqllottees or the co os the cose moy be; Section 3 4-Functions of the Authority: grant a relief of refund in the present matter in passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Newtech Pro Private Limited Vs Stdte of U,P. and ors, (Supra) M/s Sana Realtors Private Limited & other Vs U, ion of India & others 2 wherein it has been SLP (Civil) No.

73005 of 2020 decided on 12.05.2 PaEe2l of26 ffiHARERT\ #- eunuenRv laid down as under: "86.

From the scheme of the Act of which a detailed made ond toking note of power of adjudication regulotory authority and adjudicating officer, whotfi although the Act indicates the distinct expressions like 'penolty' and 'compensation', a conjoint reading of S clearly manifests thatwhen it comes to refund ofthe o on the refund amount, or directing payment of in delivery ofpossession, or penalq/ and interest thereon, authority which hos the power to exomine and determ a complaint.

At the some time, when it comes to a q relief of adjudging compensotion and interest thereon 14, 18 qnd 19, the adjudicoting ofrcer exclusively determine, keeping in view the collective reading of Section 72 of the Act. ifthe odiudication under Section other than compensation as envisoged, if extended oflicer as pruyed that, in our view, may intend to scope of the powers and functions ofthe adjudicating 71 and that would be ogoinstthe mandate ofthe Act 2 34.

Hence, in view ofthe authoritative pronouncement Court in the cases mentioned above, the authority entertain a complaint seeking refund of the amou refund amount.

G. amount.

G.

Findings on the relief sought by the complainant.

G. t Direct the respondent to refund an amount paid b the respondent i.e,, Rs.8,93,017/- along with inte the date of payment till actual realization of the 35.

The complainant submits that he has paid an amou which receipt was issued by the respondent/b Thereafter no allotment Ietter was issued and no b was executed betlveen the parties.

The compla further payment to the respondent leading to builder.

5948 of2022 & others tference has been ineated with the lly culls out is that 'refund', 'interest', s 18 and 19 ount, and interest rest for delayed is the regulotory the outcome of ion ofseeking the nder Sections 12, as the power to n 71 read with 12,14,18 ond 19 the adjudicating nd the ambit and cer under Section 16." the Hon'ble Supreme as the jurisdiction to t and interest on the the complainant to @ 180/o P.a. from id amount. t of Rs.

8,93,017l- for der on 02.04.2013. lder buyer agreement ant stopped making cancellation by the Page 22 of 26 tr HARERA S*eunuennr,r 36.

According to the respondent/builder, they assert th indeed bdok a unit by paying Rs.

8,93,0t7 /- on 02. was issued for this transaction.

However, they c provided an allotment application form to the com sent several letters requesting payment of th Subsequently, after a prolonged period of waitin& on 02.07 .2016 and forfeited the entire booking amo 37.

Upon perusal of the documents on record, the auth complainant paid Rs.

8,93,017/- for which the respo receipt for this payment on 02.04.2013.

However, de: issuance of a receipt, no allotment letter was provid buyer agreement executed between the parties.

The to state any reason as to why an allotment le respondent despite receiving the said amount from complainant fulfilled their part of the agreement payment, but the builder failed to provide the nec and formalize the transaction through an allotment I agreement. agreement.

Without these crucial documents, the been justified in rvithholding further payments.

38.

Secondly, the respondent issued a cancellation le stating that the commercial unit was cancelled d non-compliance with timely payment of allotment installments.

However, the authority observes that n regarding payment plans were agreed upon betwee This presents a discrepancy in the situation.

If there 39. terms and conditions regarding payment plans be Page 23 of 26 Complai No.5948 of2022 & others t the complainant did .2013, and a receipt aim that they never lainant.

Instead, they remaining balance. ey cancelled the unit nt. ity observes that the dent/builder issued a ite this payment and nor was a builder- spondent has failed was not issued by e complainant.

The y making the initial ary documentation tter or builder-buyer mplainant may have r dated 02.07.2016, to the conlplainant's oney and subsequent terms and conditions the parties. re no agreed-upon n the parties, then ffiHARERA ffi euntlcRArv the cancellation of the unit based on non-paymen absence ofa formal agreement outlining payment the respondent may not have had grounds to canc non-payment.

40.

The authority seems perplexed as to why the res booking amount paid by the complainant without ful and in the absence of any application form, allo buyer agreement [BBA).

Forfeiting the booking am obligations or providing essential documentation s 47.

Also, the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribun Mr.

Dinesh R.

Humane and anr, Versus Piramol 17.03.2027, the following has been observed: i. "ln the instant case the transaction of sale and pur cancelled at initial stage.

Allottees merely booked the amount towards booking and executed letter for req of the flat in printed form, Thereafter there is n transaction and neither allotment letter nor confirma by Promoter, Agreement for sale is not executed b Parties never reached to the stage ofexecuting a was no attempt to execute agreement on the part ofe circumstances, umstances, Allottees cannot claim refund on effect at clause (L8l of"model agreement" for sale u In fact, claim ofAllottees for refund cannot be suppo model agreement for sale under REM rules.

Refund promoter can be demanded as per Section 1B ofRE promoter fails to give possession on agreed date or project as per terms and conditions of agreement Complai No.

5948 of 2022 & others is uniustified.

In the edules and deadlines, the unit solely due to ondent forfeited the ng their obligations t letter, or builder- unt without fulfilling ms unjust.

I in the case titled as te Pvt.

Ltd, dated hase of the flat is flat and paid some est of reservation progress in the ion Ietter is issued n the parties. ent for sale.

There ther party. ln such basis of binding der rules of RERA. by clause 1B of of amount paid to on the ground that ils to complete the sale.

Transaction Page24 of26 HARERA GURUG|?AI\/ in the instant case is not governed by Section 18 pecutiar matter, though the claim ofrefund is not specinc provision ofRERA, itcannotbe ignored is to protect interest of consumer.

So, whatever home-buyer to the promoter should be refunded his withdrawal from the proiect." 42.

In view of the reasons stated above and judgeme respondent was not within its right to retain amo complainant.

Thus, the complainant is entitled to g amount paid by him along with interest at the presc 43.

The authority hereby directs amount received by it i.e., Rs.

8,93,017/- with intr [the State Bank of India highest margina] cost of applicable as on d ate +20A) as prescribed under rule Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 payment till the actual date of refund of the amoun provided in rule 16 ofthe Rules ibid, Directions of the authority Hence, the authority hereby passes this order an directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure co cast upon the promoter as per the function entrusted section 34(0: i. n 34(0: i.

The respondent/promoter is directed to refund it from the complainant in all 23 cases along wi H.

44. ll.70o/o p.a. as prescribed under rule 15 of th Page 25 of 26 Complain No.

5948 of 2022 & others RERA.

In this ed by any t obiect of RERA ount is paid by the Allottee on t quoted above, the ts received from the : refund of the entire bed rate. t-pro oter to return the at the rate of 11.10% ending rate IMCLR) 5 ofthe Haryana Real m the date of each within the timelines issues the following liance of obligations the authoritv under e amount received by interest at the rate of Haryana Real Estate HARERA GURUGRA\I 46.

The complaints stand dispos 47.

Files be consigned to registry.

Harvana No.5948 of2022 & others [Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 the date of each payment till the actual date ofrefund ofthe amount. ii.

A period of 90 days is given to the to comply with the legal consequences directions given in this order and failing whi would follow.

45.

This decision shall mutatis mutandis apply to cases this order. tioned in para 3 of 6' LI *:r v Kumar Arora) Member HARERA GURUGRAM Page 26 of 26 Dated: 16.08.2024