SANTOSH KUMARI AND OM SINGH vs ANSAL HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION LTD.

*HARERA $-eunuennM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE RIGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Ch.lrpeFon itember MembeI Couhiel tor Comptahant Couhsel for Rcspondeht no.

I Counsel for nesponde no.2 2794 ol2023 t6.06.2023 13.05.2025 ComplahtNo 279{ ofZO23 Complaint no, Date offltirt Dare o, decision 1.

Santosh Kumari 2.

OMSinsh Both RR/o: Hou5e \o.

15944.

Housine boJrd corony sector 10A.

Curueram -IZ20O1 Versu{ L l,1/, An.dl Hou.lrg Lrd. tFata"ar knowr a 4^al drurnq & Lon<tutLr t,d t Iesq.. offc€, r" L;F rndraprakdsh.

2r B.,rakh.nrbhJ Road nel^ Dethr 110001 2.

N1/s sdmy,rk prure(!s pvt t.rrt R€gd. omcer r lt, la floor.

Antriksh BhavtJn KU 14arg.

New Dejhi- I10001 3.

M/s MNC Propbuild pvt. r,td.

Regd.omc€: Q s/ lZ.

DLFciry, ph-2,6urcaon- 1220n) Complalnanrs CORAM: ShriVijay Kuma.

Goyal ShriAshok Sangwan APPEARANCE: 5h HJrshrt Barra (AdvocareJ 5h.

Amandeep t(adyan [Advocare) Sh shanker wrg fAdvocarel l ORDER The present comptaint has been filed by the complai.ants/alonees under section 31 olthe Real Esrare (Regulation and Devetopmentl Act,2015 [in r& HARERA GUl?UGRA]V 2 l.

F r _ ++l!i_ +-ttttt. ffi Conplaint No.

2294 ot 2023 sho.t, theActl read wirh ruje 28 ofthe Haryana ReatEsrate (Regutarion and Developmenr) Rutes, 2017 (in shorr the Rutesl fo. violatjon of section I1(41(al otthe Act wherein it is ir.e. r1to prescrtbed rhar the promoter shall be responsible for all objigations, responsibiljtres and fundions under the provisions ofthe Acr or the Rujes and regulations made there under or to the allottees as per the agr€ement for sate executed ,raer se.

Unltand prorect related deralls The particLrlars of unir detajts, sale consideratjon, the amount pard by the complajnants, date ofproposed handtng over the possessron, detay period, it any, have been detailed in the fojlowjng tabuta r form: Ansals Hu b 83 Boulehd. s€.ttr-atu;u=sram- 09/2018 Dated 08 (]1 Zl]ts l Lr.ehse No.

71 ot Z0tl] dar.d Lsog 201() (Piaeno.4t of (omotalnrl t:.o2.zor81n2 rs not rrricoii mi[Efl Ip?re no.

Ip?re no.

66 orcomDtdr. q"se so o1 ,iaii - -l L fum-;a hz -l Po*sio;nae I rr?

D"vetoper \hal ofi?;;jji ;t onv tin" o i lpe,todol4zno4th\FonthedoEotexkunhot aQteenert a, wttht4 42 holths ron rhe doLe nt abtotn'4q olt t he <ourcd \a4t t to+ ohd onDt.lot ry\esa.r tot .onierencnt ot rcast;u.uoh wh\4pte, i\ tatpr. tL4h"r thpre shotl De o otu,p pet,od 6 nonth\ olto,ed @ the d"v.toDe;oE, *HARER^ S- eunuemu " )ffiyidi1i"trt!.*,..",, lCa., uldred iroh 't e dJte or ErecuUon o, ,. l-. ll';:e;;e;;;:r; ''**-"(rtrd R' I8,o8,rsJl d'nEJro'"p"nod olb monrn<l + ,..,., . - lrdseerp.p.no.r orrnprd,nt) pJid b, the Rs.2c,82.721l. i,..-^-.^_- (asfcrSoLld rcd rnrt I I nu D trr B Facts ofth€ comptatnt 3.

Ihe complarnants have made the iollolring submissjons in the comptaintl a.

Thar the Conrplainanrs booked a unit in rhe p.ojed of the Respondent conpanies nrnrety.ANSAL,S ItUB 83 aoULEVARD,, Ithe,,p.oiecf,) ar scctor83, Curugram.

Thatthe RespondeotNo.I was.esponsjble tor the devetopment oirhe project and has rhe registration of the proiect jn ts name under Regjstration Number0g of 201A dated 08.01.2018 granted vide Memo No.

HREM-433/2017 /g7.

The RERA Registration Number 09 oi 2018 dated 08.01.2018 granted vide Memo No.

HRERA- 433/2017 /97. b- That rhe Project came Respondent No.

3 who was acting in connivance wjth Respondent No 1 & 2.

Respondent No.

3 ensured thar rhe project shaU be one ofa kind of commercial complex wirh atj the amenitjes and w,ll €ntajl tuxury facilities.lt was communicated to rhe Complainanrs tha he projecthas attained all the necessary app.ovals and pians and the constructi.n EE;;iiffiiil.,:* to the knowtedge of rhe Comptainant throu8h Complaintxo.

2z94of 2023 IIHARER" $- eunuennv shallbe smoothtya.d retigiousty compteted.

That it was concealed irom the Complainants thar Respondenr No.

1 r.e.

Ansal Housrng and Construdion Limited isjusta devetoperofrhe projectand the owneroi the iand on wbich the projed is be,ng builr is Samyak project pvt Ltd. herein Respondent No.2. dent No.2.

Thatthe Respondenr No. t has signed a MOU with rhe Respondent No.2 to devetop rhe projecr under rhe name of "ANSAL'S HUB83 BOULEVARD,asRespondenrNo. t has goodwjlt rn the nra.ket to sell the project before the scheduled rime.

The Comptainants were shown a site ptan and Respondenr No.

3 made rhe Complajnanrs believe that the bookings in the project are filling up fasr and that rhe Complainants willmiss a chance of a lifetime.

That being persuaded by rhe maniputative raftics ofRespondenr No.3. the Complainants carefully perused the site ptan shown by the Respondenrs and vide an application dat€d 20.05.2013 booked a unir no.

C 104 admeasuring 233 sq. ft. and pajd a bookjng amount of {5,00,000/-.

At this stage, it is pertinenr ro nore thar shaft area was noted as separate from the covered area, ,.e., the built-up area as per clause 20 of the Application fo.m.

That after rhe bookinS was made by the Complainants, the malafide acrivities ofthe Respondenrs began ro unturn and rh e fatse promjses, assurancesand war.anties sawthelight Thatat the time ofmaking rhe booking, the Complainants were assured thatthebu,lding plans havebeen dulysancrioned and Respondent no.

I has the pernission to develop the project.

However, the same was not truc and a mere ractic ro get the booking of the Complainant.

The Complainanrs gor to know about the project which has not even been launched and there was no anticjpation of launching the same.

Morcover, at the time ofbooking, the paymenr pjan was never shared by tr'r,*-- # t$ UGRAI\I llA GUR ComplainrNo.

279,tof 202?

RERA the Complainants.

That however, the Respondents never sam€ and Ieft the querjes and grievances of the replied to the Complainants e.

That subsequently, the bujlding pjan of the project was app.oved on 11.09.2013 and the Respondent No. t had informed the Complainants about the same and on irs own volirion and arbitrariness, rhe unrt was changed to G-109 admeasur,ng 249 sq. ft. (the,,old Unit,,l and a builde. a builde. buyer agreement was signed on tt.l2.2}l4_ That by rhjs time, the Complainants had already made a substanriat sum ofpaymentand had no option but ro accept the one-sided and arbitrary dema.ds oi Respondenr no.

1.

Moreove, the said agreement was filled wirh various one{ided and arbitrary clauses like clause 10 ( exte.naj etecrrification chargesl, 22 (earnesr money is 20% of basic sales pricel, ctause 24 ( compounded interest @24% p.a., compounded quarterly, is being cha.ged from the Complainant ior delaypayment charges], clause 33 & clause 39 ( handover of physical possession is made subjected allrypes of incidental expenses to be paid by the Comptainanrs and obtainjng of no objection ce.tificate from rhe maintenance agency which is further subjected to ma jntenance/electricjty suppty/ DC power backup agreement l, clause 34 (wherein rhe Buye. ,s only ljable fo. paying Rs.

5/ per sq. fi. per months on super area in the event oroff,ering detayed possessionl etc.

When the Comptainants objected about the same. rhe Respondents communicated rhat the same has to be executed as it is without any changes and refusal to execute rhe agreement wr tead to cancellation of attotmenr and torfeirure of entire amount paid.

The complainanrs were given no option but to execure rhe said asre€menr #Hnnrnr gP- GURUGRA]V s i h Consequenrly, the buitder buyer agreemenr was 7l-t2.2014 Thar the Complainants were coerced to accept the Change rn unir, however, aire. execution of rhe agreement, when rhe Complainants visited the site and sought the necessary sire ptans from th€ people at site, itwas revealed that more than 500/o oithe covered arealcarpet area of the Unir was taken up in an inrervening shafr in the unit.

The Complaina.ts were co mp tetely shocked to learn about rhe same.

Th is issu e was thereafter broughr to rhe norice oa res ponden t no. t. wh. communicated to the compla,nants &ar the only unir available is one othe. shop no.

C,172 admeasuring 283 sq. ft.

83 sq. ft. [the ,,Unrt,,), however, it was nored rhateven rhesaid unitalsohad an intervenrng shaft a.ea.

The complainants .equested for another unit and communjcated ro the respondents rhat his entire life,s hard_earned money has been put inro this projefi and it was a sheer disappoinrment ro learn about rhe intervening areas in the uniL However, the requesr otthe compjainants was not paid heed ro and the complajnants were onlygiven an option to get the unit no.

G-172 which had approximately 2 oyo ofrhe shafr area.

That having no other oprion whatsoever, the Comptainants had to accept the same.

Consequently, a new devetoper buyer agreement was executed on 13 02.2018 and a letter dared 20.01.2020 was wrirten by the Complajnanrs wherein the Respondenr no.

I accepted th€ original docum.ntsofprevious unit and issue.la hand wri(en nore staring: Theoriginal receipts issued againstunirno, c l0Bunirremainsamefbr C 172 and the payments made wjll be adjusted accordingty tor C,172.

The balance payment sha be demanded as and when required, lrHARERT s- Gunucnnr j.

That it is pe.tjnent to nore that the construcnon work tor unit C 172 had not begun and hence there was no obtigation of the Complainants to make rhe payment at rhat srage, accordingly, the payments atready made where ddtusted in advdn.e. wrthour dny rntere\t.

The complainants requesred the Respondents to adjust the inreresr accrued on the moneyatready paid, however, thesame was blatantly refused by the Respondenr no.

L That ir is imperative to note that even the new agreement was iiled with simitar highly arbitrary and one sided clauses.

That however, even rhough rhe Respondent No.

I and 3 assured the Complainanrs that thepossession timetjnes shal remain effecriveas per the previous agre€ment butrhesamewas notnoted in theamended in clause 30 ofthe newagreement.

This has caused utrerharassment of the Complainants and given an uodue enr,chment ro rhe Respondents. spondents.

It is a seEted princtple oflaw tharno one should ga,n rhe benefit otrheir own wrong, however, rhe RespondeDts have, very conveniently, wrongf,ully gained by causing wrongtul loss ro rhe Comptainants. k.

That the shait area in the Unif cannot, under any circumstance. whatsoever, be a part ofthe sateabte ar€a.

The shaft area is coinciding with the ca.pet area.

That since this shatt area is not being utiljzed by the Complainants, undue enrichment to rhe Respondenr no.

1 and 2 cannot begivenand no amountforrhis shaftarea can be take. from the Complainanrs.

Accordingty, the amou.r paid towards the same should be relunded along with inreres! rilt actual realization oithe same.

That the Respondents had wrongfully charged corner pLC of Rs.

3,6s,070 from the Comptainanrs, however, it is a matter of iact and record that due to the inrervening shaft, the unir is no more preierenrialtv locate.l ffHARERA SP, eunuenntr 1.

That it ts a sertled proposition o aw as noted by this Ld.

Author,ty the case ritted as Varun cupra v Emaar India Limited Complainr No.

4031 of 2019, order dated 12.08.202t that if the unir so offered is not preierentiajly tocated, rhe Respondent buitder is liabte to rerurn rhe amounr paid by rhe a ottee i. rhat regard, along wirh interest.

Thar acco.dingly, the unju st enr,ch menr taken by the Responde.ts no.

I and 2 should be raken into accountand the retund ofpLC amount atongwith inreres itldareof realizat,on shoutd begiven. m.

That Respondenrs no.

1 and 2 had enrered into a Memorandum ot (lndersranding on 12.04.2013 wherein the development righrs of the Project were r.ansierred from Respondent No.2 to Respondent N o.

1 on the basis of whjch, the development oi the project was carried on by Respondenr No.

Th.oughout the course otrelarjonship berween the Respondents no. t and 2, rhe MOU between the parues was rerminared by Respondenr No.

2. enr No.

2.

Consequently, the dispute berween the Respondents was referred to Arbitration and are pendjng adjudjcarion before rhe Ld.

Sole Arbitrat Tribunal ofJustice A.

K.

Sikri, former iudge of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India jn a case titted as ,,Case 01: Ansal Ilousing Lrmited vs Samyak projects private Limrted,, [O.M.p. ft] {COMM-) 43\ of 2020). n.

The Respondent no. t had soughr an interim retiet oi stay on rhe termination, however. the same was .ejected by the Ld.

Tribunat vide order dated 13.08.2021 and vide a subsequent orderdated 13.10.2021, physical possessjon of the sjte was ag.eed ro be handed over by Respondenr no.

I ro the Respondenr no.

2 and rhe carryins oi construction and evaluation activities thereofand not the co ectiob of mon.r. or \ignrnB any otdny ddd ronat do(umenr.

N f 2023 *HARERA S-Gunucmrtr q. p.

That the same was highly objected by rhe Compla,nants and a reply dated 27.01.2022 was written by the Complainants and rhe Complainanrs sough all the retevant documents, however. no clarification was gjven in thjs regard by the Respondenr no.2.

That thereafter, the Complainanrs received and email darted 28.01.2022 from the RespondenrNo.I whe.ein, jtwasconveyed bythe Respondent no 1 and the position otRespondent no.2 is only ad hoc and subject to final award.

1 strongty pointed out thar ,t has not been removed as a Developer and that Respondent no.

2 would nor require any Consenr or no,objection cenjflcat€ and the same does not form a part olrhe p.ocedurat ord er.

That subsequently, an emajl dated 02.02.2022 was received from Respondent no.

2 wherein a brief summary of the procedural orders passed by the T.ibunat and €opies of rerminar,on norice and public notice issued were giv€n and it was restated that it was carrying and complete the constructjoo otthe project.

That on the basis otthe above, prima facie, ir js evidenr rhe currentty, rhe const.uction ofthe project has to be caried on by the Respondent no. ondent no.2, however, both Respondenrno.l and 2 areioinrty and severally liabte to complete the developnent ofthe projedand for other grievances ofthe Complainants.

Akhough rhe physicalsratus if the site evidenrly shows2 that no construcrion is beinS carrjed and rhe above said arransement is That pursuant to the above, the Complainants were called in the omce of dre Rcspondent no.

2 and we.e handed over rwo copres ot the addendum agreement and were coe.ced to sign the same.

The representatives ofrhe Responde.r no.2 conveyed to rhe Complainants ffHARERA $-Glnrnmnl thatfailureto sign the same wi lead to cancellation ofthe a otment and aorleiture olrhe amount pajd by the Complainants.

Thataspertheoriginal agreemenrdared 11 12.2014, RespondentNo.

I was obligated to handover the possession within 42 monrhs irom rhe date oi execution of the agreemenr or 42 months from the date of obtaining allthe requned sanctions and approvals for commencement olconstruction, whjchever is later, as per clause 30 ofrhe Agreemenr.

That as per the Form A H of the projecf the bu ilding plan was approved on 14.05.2014, thus computing the due date trom rhe date of executjon ofthe agreement dated 11.12.2014 it comes out to be 11.06 2018.

That however, as per the subsequent agreemenr dated 13.02.2018 whe.e the Respondenrs had malafidety altered the due date as per clause 30 contingent upon dare of execurion of agreement.

It is necessary to noteat this i.stance,that the said clause does not prescribe whether the date of n€w agreement or previous agreement js to be considered.

In such a circumstance, since the change is only due ro the presence olshalt jn the unit, solelydue to fauh ofthe Respondents, the date ofthe previous agreement has to be considered.

That it is pertinent to mention that vjde tetter dated 05.10.2019 rhe Respondents acknowledged rheir fautt and thus wrote they shal nor cha. l nor cha.ge any interest against the instatment oa2nd floor roof stab ofrhe new unit as the construction is not up to the pa. ro the payments received from the Complainants for the otd unit, i.e., amount in excess had been taken by the Respondents no.

1 and 2.

That tilldate no olier ofpossession has been given by the Respondents.

Thus, due to the continuous relationship between the parties, non- delivery of possession, non-execurion ofrhe conveyance deed till dare, Pasel0ot33 N c.

I}HARERA ls-eunuennnr the provisions of the Act shall be appl,cable in the present case.

Tharour olrhe totatsale price ofi40,40,s57l-, the Complainants have pa,d a sum of 129,a2,722/. includins rhe amount of i4,482l-paid rowards the labo. cess as +2% from the due date ofoffe. ofpossession titl the actuat handing ove. otphysicat possession.

Reli€fsought by th€ comptainant ThF, ^1)pidrndnr trs ,oLgnr the Iojtow,ng ret eh. a.

To hoid thatboth Respondent no.

1 and 2 arejointlyand severalty tiable in resped to the project. b.

To direct Respondent no.

1 and 2 ro provide the vaUd physicat possess,on ro rheComplainantafterprocurjngtheoccupancycernficate. c.

1 and 2 to give delay possession charges @ NICLR +270 from the due dare of offer oi possession tjlt the actual handing over of phys icat possessio n. d. 'lo direct the respondent no.l and 2 to refund theamount paid rowards thearea,n which shaftis beingcoveredin tle uni! as determined by LC, along with i.teresr. e.

To direct the respondentto refund th€ amounr oft4,482l pajdbyrhe .ompldinanr iol^ards rhe labor cpss charges. t To directthe respondentto not charges any illegalcharges. g.

1 and 2 to not charge labor cess, etectrification charges, EEC and FtipBIC charges, as the same are ilegat. h.

To direct respondenr no.1 and 2 ro execute the conveyancedeedj i.

To penalize the respondent no.3 under section 62 ofthe Act; j.

To penalize respondenr no.

1 and 2 for non submissjon of Btp. on of Btp. and violation ofsection 61 for non-extension ofregistration ofthe projecr.

I}HARERA S eunucnavr 5.

0n the date ofhearing, rhe aurhorty explained to the respo.dent/promoter about the conrravenrions as a eged to have been committed in .ejarion to section 11(41 (al otthe act to plead guilty or not to plead suitty.

D.

Reply by the respohdent no.1.

6.

The respondent no. t hascontested the coInplajnton the following Srou nds. a.

That the compta,nants had approached the answering Respondent tor booking a shop no.

C,108 in an upcoming project Ansal Boulevard, Sector 83, Curugra m Upon the satisfact,on of th e co m plainant regardi.g jnspection oirhesite, ritle, locarion plans, etc. an agreement to seltdated 11.12.2014 was signed berweeo the parties. b.

Thar the currenr dispute cannot be governed by rhe RERA Acr, 2016 because ofthe iact thatthe bujlderbuyer agreement signed berween the complainant and the answering Respondent was in the year 2014.

It is submitted rhat $e regutations ar the concerned rime pe.iod would regulare rhe projectand not a subsequenrteeislation i.e.

RERA Act.20t6 1t is furthersubmitted that parliamenr woutd.ot make theoperarion oi a sratute retrospective in effect, c.

That even iffor the sake ofargumen! the avermenrs and the pteadings in the comptaint are taken to be true, the said comptainr has b€en prelerred by the complainant belatedly.

The compta,nanr has adminedty filed the complaint in theyear 2023 and the cause ofacrion accrue on 11.12.2018 as per the complajnr irselt Therefore. it is submirted rhat the compla,nt cannot be filed before the HRERA Gurug.am.s rhesanre is barred by timtarion. d.

That even if the complaint js admitted ro be true and co.rect. rhe agreemenr whjch was signed in the year 2014 without coercion o. any duress caDnor be called jn question today. k is submitted thar the ffHARERA {!, ounuenqttl builder buyer agreement provides for a penalty jn the event ofa delay rn givjng possession. ossession.

Ir is su bmttted rhat clause 3 4 ot rhe said agreemen t provides ior Rs. s/ sq foot per month on super area for any detay in ofiering possession of the unit as mentioned in CIause 30 of rhe agreement.

Thereiore, the complainant will be entitled to invoke rhe sa,d clause and is barred irom approachjng the Hon,ble Commission in order to alter the penatry clause by vi.tue ofthis compraint more rhan 8 years airerjt was agreed upon by both parties.

That the Respondent had in due course otr,me obrained aU necessary approvals Lom the concerned authorities.

Ir rs submjtted that thp permit ior envi.onmental clearances for proposed group housing project lor Sector 103, Curugrarn, Haryana on 20.02.201s.

Similarty, the approval ior digging ioundarion and basement was obrajned and sanctions irom the department ofmines and geolog] were obtained rn 2012.

Thus, the Respondents have jn a rimely and prompt manner ensured rhat the requjsite compliances b€ obtained and cannot be faulted on giving delayed possess,on to the Complainant.

That the answerine Respondent has adequately explained the delay.

It is submitted that rhe delay has been occasjoned on account ot things beyond the conrrolofrhe answering Respondent.1t is further submitted that the builder buyer agreement provjdes aor such evenrualities and the cause for delay is conrptetely covered jn rhe said clause.

The Respondent ought to have complied with the orders otthe Hon,ble Hjgh Court ofPunjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWp N o.2oo32 ot2o0A. dated 16.07.20t2,31.0? _2012, 21.08.2012.

The said orders banned rhe extraction ofwater which is rhe backbone oithe construction process.

Similarly, the complainr irsetfreveals that rhe .orrespondence from the THARER^ S- GunLrcnu,,l h E Answerjng Respondent specifies force majeure, demonerizarion and the orders ofrhe Hon'ble NGT prohibiting construcnon jn and around Dethi and the COVID -19 Fndemic among others as the causes which contributed ro the sra ing oi the project at c oject at crucial jundures to. consjderable spells.

That rhe answering respondenr and the complainant admittedly have entered into a builde. buyeragreement which provides for the event oi delayed possession. lt is subnitted that ctause 3t of the buitder buyer agreement js clea. that rhere is no compensation ro b€ soughr by the complalnant/prospective owner ID tfie event ofdelay in possession That the answering Respondent has clearly provided in clause 34 the consequences thar fotlow from detayed possession.Ir is submifted thar the Complainant cannot aher rhe rerms ofthe conrract by preferring a complaint beaore rh€ Hon,ble HRERA Gurug.am.

That admirredly, the Complainanr had signed and agreed on Bujlde.

Euyer Agreement dared 14.12.2014.

That pe.usat ofrhe said agreemenr would show thar rt js a Trjpartite Agr€ement whe.ein tvt/s Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd.,s also a party ro thesaid agreement.

Thatthe perusal ofthe Bu ilder Buyer Agreeme nt at page 3 woutd show that M/s Samyak Projects pvt.

Lrd. not only possesses a the rights and unf,ettered ownership of rhe said ]and whereupon rhe project namely Ansalboulevard, Sector33 is being developed, butatso isa deveroper in the said proiecr.

That the operating tines at page 3 oitbe Builder Buyer Agreenrenrareas fottow:,,The Developerhas entered intoanagreement with the Confi.ming parry 3 j.e.,14/s Samyak projects pvt.

Ltd. totojntty p.omote, develop and market the proposed project beingdeveloped on the land as aforesaid.' t.

E.

7 *HARERA $-eunucnm,r k.

The said tv/s Samyak project pvt.

Ltd. in rerms ofjts arrangement wjth the respondenr could not develop rhe said project well within rime as was agreed and gjven ro the respondenr, the detay, ifany, rs on rhe pari of [4/s Samyak project pvt.

Ltd. not or the part otrespondent, because the construction and developmenr of rhe said project was underraken by M/s samyak project p,t.

Ltd.

That jn an arbikal pro€eeding before the Ld.

Arbirraror lustice A.K Sikri, M/s Samyak project pvr. oject pvr. has taken over rhe present project the answering Respondent f,or completion of the project and rhe Respondent has no locus or say in the present Reply by rhe respondent no,2 The.espondent has contested the complaint on rhe followinggrounds: a.

Thar rhe respondent no.2 r.e., Samyak projects pvi Ltd. (Landowner) and respondent no.1 i.e., ANSAL Housing Const.uctions Ltd. (Developer/ AHL) entered into a MoU dated 12.04.2013 [hereinafter relerred ro as "MoU,,l in respect ofconstruc$on and developmenr oia proiect known as ANSAL BOULEVARD 83 (he.einafter refer.ed to as "said Projecf'1, situated on a land admeasuringZ.60 acres (equivatent to 20 Kanal 16 [4artas), situated in Village Sihi, Tehsit & District Curgaon in Sector- 83 ofGurgaon, Manesar iorming a part of License No.

113 of 2008 dated 01.06.2009 and Li.ense No.71 of2010 dared 15.09.2010.

As per the said tvtou, the respo.dent no.1 being the devetope., made sales ofvarious units ro the allotteeIs), executed builder buye. agreementG) with allottee(sl and atso received sale consideration amounr from the allottee(s).

The .espondent no.2 was nor a parry to any bu,tder buye. agreemen t executed between .espondent no.1 and rhecomplainantaDd forthe same respondent no.2 i.e.samyak projects pvr.

Ltd havetiledan page 15o133 No, 2794 of 2023 I}HARERA d$- eunucnqur appljcation under Order 7 Rute t t under CpC for rejection oiplaint as a parry jn this complainr. b.

Thar the perusal ofthe buitder buyer agreeme.t at page 3 (,,Clause D,,) would show thar M/s Samyak p.ojects pvt.

Ltd possesses a the rights and unfettered ownership of rhe said land whereupon the projects namely boulevard 83, Sector 83 curgaon, Haryana is being developed.

That the operating ljnes at pase 3 [,Clause D,) oi the builder buyer agree ment a re as aollows: 'The developer has entered i n ro an agreemen r with the conlirming party i.e., M/s Samyak p.ojects pvi Ltd. c.

As respondent no. ondent no.l failed ro fu1fl ltsobtigation under the said MoU and construction ol the said project was substantialy detayed Therefore, due to abjectfailure of respondenr no.t to perform irsobligatjons under thc said MoU and to construct rhe said project, rhe respondent no.2 being left wrth no other option, rerminated the said MoU vjde termination notice dated 10.11.2020. d The respondenr no.2 also pubtished a pubtic norice in rhe newspaper dated 16.12.2020 iniorming the public ar large about rhe terminarjon oi said MoU by respondent no.2 due to breach ofth€ t€rms ofmou by rhe respondent no.1.

The respondent no.1 challenged rhe t€rmination of MoU before the Hon'ble High Court of Dethi in oMp (tl (CoMMl No.431 ol 2020 rn the matter ritled as "Ansat Housing Limited vs.

Samyak Projects Private Limited" under Secrion 9 of the Arbitrat,on and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The Hon'ble High Courr ot Delhiwas pteased ro refer the matter ro Arbitration and appointed lustice A.K Sikri, (Retired Iudse of Supreme Court] as the Sole Arbjtraror and appojnted Local 1}HARERA $- eunLrcmv g.

It came to the knowledBe ofrespondent no.Z rhat respondent no.1 has done severaldummy transactions by creating iake profiles ofallottees.

Thus, rhe respondeor no.2 jssued norice dared 04.05.2023 ro rhe complainant aor ve.ificarion of the comptainant and legjtjmacy ot rh. transaction undertaken by respondent no.1. h.

Notice dated 04.05.2023 ro the complainanrs in order ro comply with the verification process.

It was specifjcally mentioned rhar, in case no response is received on or beiore 20.05.2023 from thealottees, then the allotment ol the sa,d unit bearing no.

C,172 shall stand torleited/cancelled.

Despite numerous attempts ro engage with the addressees oithe complainants, nosatjsfactory responseorcompliance The Learned Arbitraror rejected rhe prayer ot respondent no.1 fo.sray on the terminarion of MoU and directed the respondent no.1 to handover rhe possession of sajd projecr on 14.10.2021 to . .2021 to .espondent no.2 for taking over the balance construction of the said projecr.

The Learned Arbirraror vide order dared 02.09.2022 hetd thar .espondent no.2 shall also be aree to approach the allottees and demand and/or collect monies f.om rhem in respect ottheir units.

That the answering respondent actjng in good faith and in the rnterest of public at la.ge, in benefir/inte.esr of rhe altottees of the aforementioned projecf the answering respondent sought to a uth e n ticate a n d verii, the veraciry of the agr€ements/altormen ts made by AHLand urged the aitottees including the compta inanrs vide various emails to come forward ior KyC process and show bona fide by payjnC the balance anounts payable due as the projed stood on the verSe of o1202-l ffHARERA 9F- eunucnnrl was received, leading to the canceltation of the allotment of said unjr bearjng no.

C-172 in question. i.

Since respondent no.1js registered as promorer,in respect of the said proiect with the Reat Estate RegulatoryAutho.iry I RERA,), respondenr no.2 requires a no objection certificare from the allortees tor rhe purpose ofcarryingiorth the developmen r of the said projectand obtain necessary permission irom the RERA.

Thereaore, in orderto change the developeroisaidproject,theresporjdentno.2 requ,redwrittenconsenr of the allottees of said project. tn this regard, respondenr no.2 issued notice d:ted 26.05.2023 and 03.08.2023 .equesting the complainanfto sign the addendum agreement with respondenr no.2 ro accepr and acknowledge respondent no.2 as thenew developer. j.

That mo.e than 135 satisfied aitotrees aite. alt rhe verification process executed rheaddendum agreemen t with the respondenr no.2 wherein i! was agreed that the alto$ees will nor nale any ctaim against respondenr n o.2 till the expiry otpermitted period ot completio. ot sajd project as granted by the retevant aurhorities. rhorities.

It was further agreed by the allottees thar atlottees wiil not initiate any c,vil, criminal or legal proceedings olany narure whatsoever against respondenr no.2 before the exprry olrhe permitted p€riod ofcomplerion ofsaid project. k.

That said Ansat Housing t,td in terms otits BBA dated t t 12.2014 wirh the Complainant.

It is pertinent to note that the delay in comptetion oa the P.oject is caused due to the malieasance and negtjgence of rhe l\4/s Ansal Housing Ltd.

Not on the parr Respondent No.2, because the construction and development of the said project was undertaken by M/sAnsalHousinsLtd.

I}HARERA S- Gunuc,n,qur Compl.int No.

2794of 2023 L Respondent No.2 has proceeded to commission expe(s who are in rhe p.ocess of derermining the starus of the consrruct,on and the turther steps /construction necessary ro comptete the project, Respondent No 2 is making its best endeavors to ensure rhat the progress of rhe said Project can be fast rracked.

However, the pace of development oisaid Project is being affected by irivolous and premarure challenged beins made against the efforts ofRespondent No.2.

That after fuUy understanding that Respondent no.

Z as a tand owne. hnve rheirlinlted liabilitjes tothe Exrend p.ovided the land only and as a connrming party and Sign Buitder Buyer Agreement wirhout having any obligation towards Comptetion and Construction and Financiat liability in rhe projectand Bu,lderBuye.Agreement.

That BBA dared 11, 1 2 2 0 14 wh ich was signed and executed wirh out coercion or any duress cannotbe called in question today.

That a bare glimpse ar rhe documents submitted by the comptainant would reveal that he does not have any privity ot contract with rhe present Respondent No 2 & respondent no 2 is neither has any responsibility regarding the paying any delay payment charges nor responsible lor handing over physical vacant possession ro rhe co m plainanr after obtaining occupation certiffcate hom the component authority under entered inro a red inro a contract with Ansal i.e., Respondent No 1.

That it is submitted that the Respondenr No 2 being a stranger ro rhe contract cannot be impleaded as respondent in the complaint as no cnuse ofaction ever accrred in favor otrhe complainanr as agarnst the p.esent Respondent no 2.

Thar ir is submitted thar since thecolnptainant has no cause ofacrion againsr the present respondent no 2, he can.or ITHA *db- ern RER4 I]GRAIV tomp c ntNo Z794orZO?l q implead him jn the array ot respondenrs and the intentional impleadment ofthe appticant as the respondenr is bad in law.

The aforesaid Respondent No.

2 bejng the land owner had entered inro an I\4oU with the AHL.

As per the said l\4OU dated 12.0S.2013 the said AHL was under obligation to construct rhe shops within the sripulated period of48 months and needless to mention the AHL has executed the Builder Buyer Agreement with various allotrees in which the Respondent No.

2 was only a conf,rming party but however the AHL builder was under obligarion to comptete rhe projecr in a timety manner and it was also clearly mentioned in thesaid Builder Buye.Agreemenr.

In case ol any delay in handling possession or any other reason, the financial liabrlity to indemnjb, the loss to the alottees was ofAHL onty It came to the knowledge ofRespondenr No.2 that Respondent No.1 has done several dummy transactions bycrearjng fake profites ofallottees.

Thus, the Respondent No.2 issued Notjce dated 04.05.2023 to the Complainant for verification ofthe Complainant and legitimacy of the transaction undertaken by Respondent No.t Thar it is submitted thar stillthe Respondenr No.2 being an honestand reputed airm js inctined to raise the entire pro,ect within an extended time period after gerting app.oval from the concerned authoriq, and atrer compliance ot usuat lornalities in the formotAddendum {which wittbe bindingcontract on Responde.t No.2 and Allortees) would hand over the units to the Allottees.

Allottees.

That it is submitted ro the allotrees that would b€ under an obligation to sign a fresh Addendum with the Respond€nt No.2 in supersession oithe previous agreement executed by the ersrwh,le AHL.

That it is submitted rhatthe complarnant has m isch ievously impleaded the present Applicanr as one of the respondents, rhe comptainanr entered into a contrad wirh Ansal i.e., Respondent No 1 only and the present Respondent no 2 is not pr,!y ro the said contract he cannot implead him in the array of respondents no 2, and the intenrionat rmpleadment oithe applicant as the respondent no 2, is bad in jaw. s.

That it is submitted rhar a bare glimpse at rhe documents submtted by the complainanr would reveal thar he does not have any p.ivrty of cont.acrwith the present respondent no t & respondent no 2 is nejrher has any responsibility regardingrhe paying any detay payment charges nor responsible fo. handing over physical vacant possession to the complainant after obtajning occupation cerrificate from the component authority underentered inro a conrract with Ansal i.e., RerpondentNo I 8.

Copies oiall the relevant documents have been filed and placed on record.

Their authenncity is not in dispute.

Hence, rhe complaint can be decided on the basis oi thes€ undispured documenrs and submission made bv the 9.

The respondent no 2 & complainant have filed the wrirten submissions on 06.0s.2025 & 04.03.2025 respectively which is taken on record The authority has considered thesamewhile d€liberating upon the retietsought by the complainants.

F.

Jurlsdiction ofthe authority 10.

The aurhoriry has complete terrirorial and subject marter turisdjction to adiudicatethe present complaint forrhe reasons given below.

F.l Territorial iurisdiction 11 As per norilication no.t/92/2017 rTcp dated 14.12.2017 issued by Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana thejurtsdictjon oaHaryana Reat Estate Regu latory Authority, Gurugram shallbe entire curugram district for allpurposes. lpurposes.ln the p resent case, the prolect in question is situated within rhe *HARERA S-eunlnnnv ComplaintNo.

2794of 202.1 *HARERi S- eunrcn,rv ConplaintNo.

2794of 2023 planning area ol Gurugram district.

Therefore, this autho.iry has comp)ete territorial jurisd,ction to deatwith the presenr complaint. t.Il Subiecr-matter iurtsdiction 12.

Section 11[4][a) of the Act, 2016 provides rhat the promoter sha]t be responsible ro the altottee as per agreement tor sale.

Sect,on 11(4)tal is reproduced as hereunder: Section 11 iit rn" p,".",",,t,tt (a) be.etponrihtefor otj ohlisoton, respanebliEs ond tuncnan\ under the provgans ol thk Act or the rLtes ond rcgulatons nade thereunaet ar to the ollatteesos per the dsreenent for sdle. ar to the a.\4\,!!Dr at rlvtr ps- o! fic,o5e n"r oe titl th",aate/a.. " ol d\ the opo nents, ptals or buildingt os the ese na, be, to the alattees, or the mnnon areas to the aseciation ol oltott es or the canpeteht authodty,as the cak no! be) Section 34-Fun.lions oI ahe Authortty: 34(j) ol the Act ptovides to ensur. cof,plionce of the obllgorons ost upoh thc prohotc\, the a ottees ond the.eol5tate altentsunder thtsActun.l the tutesand rcqLtatbns nade thereunder 13.

So, in view oi the provisjons oi rhe Act quoted aUove, rhe authoriry has comptete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regardjng non compliance oi obligations by the promorer leaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adjudicatjng officer ifpursued by rhe complainants at a larer stage.

G. tindings onth€ r€liefsoughr by the complahants.

C.l.

To hold thatbotb Respondetrt no.l aDd 2 are lotntlyard seve.auy labte in respect to the proiect; C,ll, To dlrect Respondertno. t and Z ro providetheva d physicat possessio! to the Co mpla inant after procurirg tlre occupancy certificate, G.lll.

To direct Respotrdenr no.

I and 2 to gtve delay poss€ssioD charSes @ MCLR +2%o lrom the du€ date of ofier of possession tiI the actuat handing over of physical possesston. ossesston. *HARERA dI- ounuonAu 14 ln the present marter the complajnanr was initialty allotred un,t no.

C_108. admeasuring249 sq. ft. in the project ,,Ansat H u b 83 Boulevard,, secror 83 by the respondenr,buitde. vide buyers agreemenr dated 11.12.2014 whe.ein the respondent no.

2 was the connrming party.

The complainant in irs compiainr srated that when rhe comptainanrs visited the site and sought rhe necessary site plans from rhe people at site, it was revealed rhat more than 500/0 of the covered arealcarpet area of the unit was raken up in an intervening shaft in the unir.

Thjs issue was thereafter broughr to rhe notice of respondent no.

1, who commuDicated to the complainants rhat the only unit available is one other shop no.

G-172 admeasuring 2a3 sq. ft. [rhe "Unit l, however, irwas noted thar even the said unit also had an rntervenjng shaii area.

However, rhe request of the complainants was not paid heed to and the complainants were onty given an option to get the unir no.

C-172 which had approximately 20% ofthe shaftare:.

Consequenrty, a new buyer s agreement was executed for uoit no.

G-172 for sale consideration of {38,68,383/- and they have paid a sum of 129,82,722l-.

Th€ subsequent buye.s agreemenr was execured between rhe complainant and respond€nt no.

1 wherein respondenr no.

2 was not rhe confirming parry but in the said BBA it is specificaliy wrirren rhatthe respondent no.1& 2 have entered inro a memorandum ofagreement As per clause 30 ofthe BBA, respondent no.

1 was obligated to complete the construction otthe proiect and hand over the possession of the subjecr unit wjthin 42 months trom obta,nins alt rhe required sanctions and approval sanct,ons and approvat necessary for commencement ol construcrion, whichever is later.

The due date of possession is calculated from the date ofBBA i.e., 13.02.2018 since the dare of commencement of consr.uction is not known.

The period ot 42 months endson 13. endson 13.082021 As hrasgrace period of6 months isconcerned the same ol202l ffHARERh 9!

Gunrcnniv is allowed being unqualified.

The occupation certificate ior the projecr has notyet been obtained from rhe competent authoriry.

15.

As per rhe BBA, respondent no.2(land owner) and respondent no.

1fdeveloper) entered into a r\doU dated 12.04.2013 wher€by the development and marketingoitbeprojecrwas to be done by rhe respondent no.

1 in terms of the ticense/permissjons granted by rhe DTCP, Haryana.

Upon lailure of respondent no.

I ro perform irs obligations as per MoU and complete the consrruction ot the project within the asreed rimeline. respondent no.2 terminated the saidMoUvide notice dated 10.11.2020 and ,ssued a public norice in newspaper tor termjnation ofthe ttroU.

The matrer pursuant to the dispute was referred to the DelhiHjgh Court under secrjon 9 of the Arbitrarion & ConciUation Act, 1996 and vide order dared 22 01.2021 Hon'ble High Court of Dethi appoinred the Hon bje IusticeA.K Sikri iormer Iudge olthe Hon'bte Sup.eme Court oflndia as a sole arbit.ator ofArbitrat T.ibunal.

16.

The complainant i.e., Ansal Housing pvr.

Ltd. in th€ perir,on sought various reliefs jncluding to stay the operation of the termjnarion lette. dated 10.11.2020 and the public notice dated 16_12.2020 rilt the ftnat arbitral award is given.

The Arbitrat Tribunal vide order dated 31.08.2021 granted no stay on termination notice dat€d 10.11.2020 and no restraining order in this regard was passed against the M/s Samyak proiects pvr.

Lrd.

Further. vide order dared 13.102021 otrhe sole arbitraror respondenr no.

1 was directed to handover rhe atorementioned projecr to rhe.espondent no.2.

Following the direcrive ourt,ned in rhe order dated 13.10.2021 of rhe sole arbitrator, respondent no. t handed over rhe project to respondent no.

2 via a possession lette. dared 14.10.2021, for the purpose of unde.raking the rema,ning construction rasks.

Subsequently, on 02.09. on 02.09.2022, rhe Sole PaSe 24 or33 ITHARER.\ !$- erurcnnur Comp d ntNo Z7a4of20ll Arbitrator di.ected respondent no.2 ro finatize the projecr within rhe stipulated timeline, specifically by the conctusion ofJune 2023 and to collect funds from the alloftees with a condition that rhe amount so collected shatl be put in escrow accounr.

17.

The authority is of the view that the builder buyer,s agreemenr was signed by the complainanrs and the respondent no.

In the builder buyer ag.eenrent, it was specifrcally mentioned thatrespondent no.2[land ownerJ and respondent no.

1(developer) enrered into a MoU dated 12.042013 whereby the development and markettng of rhe p.oject was ro be done by the .espondent no.

1 in terms of the license/permissions granred by the DTCP, Haryana.

Although the respondent no.2 i.e., Samyak projects pvt.

Ltd. cancelled rhe agreement vide teqnination norice dated 10.11.2020 and the matter,s subjudice before the arbitral tribunat appojnted by Delhi High Court v,de order dated 22.01.2021.Ir ls relevant to refer the definition ofrhe term'Promoter'under the section 2(zk) ofthe Real Esrate (Regularion and Developmen0 Act,2016. "2 Defintions.- kk)"pranatef n rc o peren who consttu.ts or.ouset ta be consttuctedon ndepen,lent butldtns o.a building consisthg oJ apoftnets, ot @ave/ts onexstng butldtng ot u port thereofinta aponnehtt,lor the pu.pase ol sethns ott or so e of the apormentt to other pe.sons ond hctudes hn astgneet or a pernhwho developslond inta o prciect, ||hether ot not the pe6on olsa constructs structures on ahr af the plo\, for the puryop of sellng ta other perens oll or sane ol the plots ih the said p.oject, ||hethe. wth ot wirhout stuctu.es thereon; or 18.

The authority observes that landowner is covered by rhe definition of promoter under sub clause (i) or (ji) of section 2tzk). ion 2tzk).

A person who constructs or causes to be constructed a building or apartments is a promoter ifsuch bujlding or apartmenrs are meanr for th€ purpose ofsetting #HARERA 9D eunucnav to other persons.

Similarty, a person who devetops land jnto a project i.e, land into plots is a promoter in .espect oathe fad that whether or not the person also constructsstructures on any ofthe plots. tt isclear thar a person develops land inro ptotsorconstructs buildingorapa.tmentforthepurpose oisale is a promorer.

The wo.ds,,,causes to be constructed,, in definit,on of promoter is capable ofcoverjng rhe landowner, in respecr ofconstru€tion of apartmenrs and buitdings.

The.e may be a situation where the landowner may not himselfdevelops land intoplots or consrructs buitding or apartment himsell but he causes ir to be constructed or devetoped through someone else.

Hence, the landowner is expr;ssty covered under rhe definition of promoter under section z (zk) sub ctause ti) and (iil.

19.

Further, rhe authoriry observes rhatthe occupation cedftcate aor the p.otect is yet to be received and the project stands transferred to the respondent no 2 who is now responsible to complete lhe same.

In absence of any nnat arbitration awa.d the Authoriry cannot detiberate up on rhe ratio ofitnancial Uability berween the promoters.

In view of the above, rhe liab,tity under provisions of Section 18(1) of rhe Acr & Rutes read with builder buyer agreement shallbe bornebyboththe respondenrs iointly and severa y and theliability ro handover the unit shal ie wirh respondent no.2.

20.

In view ofrhe above, rhe tiabiliry under provisions oisection 18[1) ofrheAcr & Rules read with builder buyer agreement sha be borne by rhe respondent.

The complainant intends to continue with the project and are seeking delay possession charges interest on rhe amount paid. p. t paid. p.oviso to section 18 provides that where an allotree do€s nor intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be pa,d, by the promoter, interesr for every month of delay, till the handing over olpossession, ar such rate as may be prescr,bed and ithas been prescribed under rute 15 ofrhe rules: 2794 at 2023 {THARERl, S-eunucn,qr,,r Corplarnt No 27a4 of2O2l La tton B.

RetL, n ot aaodnt a4d t onpen nn t3(1t lt,he ono.e.tott, to,onpteteot Dunublp toorp por,aron aton opatnent ptot. o.bundhg in ano,don,e ntta the k,n\ ot th" asreenpnt /ot.at? or o. thp &.e ov be. dun oaplptpou tapdate\pporcdth?."ia ot dLp to d^-aat,nLon-p af aB bu,i.e,\ os o detctopet nn otrcunL ot suspension or revocation ol the reststot@n undet ths Act at lor ani othe.reosan, he shott be liabte on denohd to the olottees, h case the oltotee\|ishes t o A I hdt o A h un t ha u uF, t r n\out pretudt e t a orJ ot h"r, e4"d, o\ltabp tu,ar.a th" anou.," +ua ^ n.-.',".oer q,n"a aparrnenaplot, bunding,osthe te nay be, with interest at su.h rate as nta! be p.eyribed n this behall induAing .onpensauon in the nanher as praviled underth6Act: Provided thatwhere onollottee do*notint d to wthdroe rton thp o atp\.-\p hor bc odd. b) .\e prc ot t. ntap! lat.very nontn al deloy, till the honding avet olk. parysiori ot such tut; os ndr be pree bed (Enphans ,upptEdl 21.

Clause 30 of the BBA pro!'tdes for hand,ng over of possession and is reproduced below: 'Ctausei0 'l'hc Derelopetsholloller pEsesioh aJthe untahttineo penad ol42 nanths fron the dote ofexe.udan ol Asteehert or wntun 42 nohths J.on the date af abtatning oll requi.ed enctions ond oppnvol neLe$ory Jor cannencehent ol canstruction. ehichever 6 tater t-L her, thete shatl be o gruce petiad af 6 nonth: ollowed to the develaperoverond abave the pqiad oJ42 nan.hsos above in olleting the pose$ion ol the unit." 22. unit." 22.

Due date ofpossession and ad missibtliry of grace period:As perclause 30 of the BBA, the possession ofrh€ allotted unitwassupposed to be offered wirhin a stipulated timef.ame of withir 42 months from rhe date ot execution oi Agreement or within 42 months from the date of obta,ning all required sanctions and approval n€cessary for commencemenr of construction. whichever is later.

The due date olpossession is calculated from the dare oi BBA i.e., 13.02.2018 since rhe date ot commencemenr of construction is not known.

The period of42 months ends on 13.08.2021.

As far as grace period of6 monthsis concerned the same,saltowed being unquatified.

Accordingty, the due date oi possession com€s our to be t3_02.2022.

The occupation certificate ior the p.ojed has not yet been obrained from the competenr authority.

23.

Payment of detay possession charges at prescribed rate of interest: The complainants are s€eking delay possession charges atthe prescribed rate oa interesr.

Proviso to section 18 prov,des that where an allottee does not intend to withd.aw irom rhe project, he shalt be paid, by the p.omoter, interest for every month of,delay, till the handing over ofpossession, ar such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rule 15 of the rules Rule 1s has been reproduced as underl Rtle 1s Pretcnbed rote oI inceren [provisoto ecuon 12, sectnn ls a"d .ub \4 t- r t4t a4d.ub p,t@r t-r ol\qnon tel tot 1 1 t rt po" ol pt a . \a t,on 1 Le,ior 18_ ond,n.,p, tnn, 4t no t't ut\ett@r 1a thp.tr.e,".t ot t\e,Jt, pter.,tDpd _4"1tb" the State Bo nk oI tndio htghest norginal c6t of leiting rote +2%..

Prcvided that in cok the *ote Bonk oftndio norytnai cost of hntling ,ot" [ut LRt .s nor ,n L:p. | ,hat b" rcpto. "d b sr. h b;n.4qa,i tprd,no rote.

A\t.h th.5tat" Boak ot lndn no, fu ftaa a"totfte lot lendihs to the geherct public.

24. ublic.

24.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legistation under the provision of rule 15 of the ruler has determined the prescribed rare of interest.

The rare ofinrerest so derernined by the te8islature, is.easonable and ilthe said rule is louowed ro award rhe interest, it will ensure uniform practice in allthe cases.

25.

Consequentty, as per website oirhe State Bank o ndia i.e., https://sb,.co.in, the marginal cost of lending rate (in short, MCLRI as on date i.e., 13.0S.202S is 9.1090.

Acco.dingly, theprescr,bed rare ofinreresrwi be marginalcost of lending.ate +20lo i.e., 1 1.10%.

26.

The deflnition or term 'interest, as defined under section Z(zal of the Act provides rhat rhe rate of inrerest cha.geabte from the aloftee by the promoter, in case oldelauh, shalt be equalto the rate otinterest which the #HARERA 9!- GunuennH,l Complarnt No 27c4 of2Oz3 ffHARERa !!- ounuenAm promoter shall be liable to pay the altottee, section is reproduced below: t.d) _t4te,4t nev^t'e,t4atht .n potobtc bt rhc ptodrkt nr the ullottee ut the Ld\" n.\ hp E\planation Far the pL;pok olthis.tou:e the rate al intetesr.horyeable fion the ollo ee br the p.onotu, n t r " ordLtonlt .a!l b? potd to, n", oLe ot hre,d wq" t ih" proate, \hatt b. ttabt" r, pov,he !tb,,p".,,op aldetabtt the tnterc\t polobje b! the pronab ta the ajtanee sha befton the date the prannter received theanouhtoronyport theteoftiljthe du? tteuqad4. ot oau t\e,eat ard -kt.t ne,?oa t_,Ed;d.d o.d th? '-tq.t pa\able b) th" atta4ee b tne /ono?,.halt bp t.o4 th" do.e , the atla ped.radt^h p nat@theprcnatet t,lt rheiatp |,. pad 27.

Therefore. rnrerest on (he d"tdy payments trom lhe.omptainanls shait be 28.

0n cons,de.ation of the documents available on mdde by rhe parrre5 regarding conoavention a\ per case oi delault.

The relevanr record and submissions provisions ofthe Act, rhe cha.ged ar the prescribed rate j.€., 11. j.€., 11.10% by rhe respondent/promorer which is the same as is being granted to them in €ase ofdelayed possession 29.

The Authoriry is of considered view that there is detay on the part of th€ authority is satisfied thar the respondent is in conrravenrion of rhe section 11(4)(a) olthe Act by not handjngover possession by the due dare as per rhe agreement.

By virtue olclause 30 of rhe buyer,s agreement, the possessron of thesubject unirwas ro bedelivered within stipLrlated time j.e., by 13.02.2022 Howeve., till date no occupatlon certiffcate has been received by .espondents aDd neither possession has been hand€d oyer ro the a ottee tj respondents to ofte. ofpossession oithe atlofted unit to the complainants as per the terms and conditjons of rhe allotment tetter.

Accordingly, t is rhe failure oi the respondent/promoter to fulfit ,ts obligations and {}HA #-crn ta".pr"i" N"a 7r1 "r,ortl ITERA UGRAI\I responsibilities as per the agreement to hand over the possession within the sripulated period.

30 Accordingly, rhe non,compliance of rhe mandate contained jn se.rion 11(a)ial read with section 18[t] of the Act on the part of the respondent/promoter is established.

Assuch, the a oftee shallbe paid by the promoter interesr for every month ofdelay from the due date ofpossession i.e., 13.02.2022 rilt the dare ot vatid oater of possessron ptus Z months after obtaining occupation ce(ificate trom the competent authority or actual handing over of possession, whichever is earlier; ar prescribed rate i.e., 11 10% p.a. as pe. proviso to sedion 18(1) otrheAct.ead with rule 1s of the 31.

As per section 17(2) oithe Act of 2016, the promoter is under an obligation to handover rhe physicat possession ofthe sajd unit to the complainant.

In view olthe above, the respondenris directed to handover possessjon ofthe flat/unrt ro rhe complainant in terms of section 17[2] of rhe Acr of 2016, within a penod oi2 months after obtainjng occupatjon certiiicate arom the competent aurhority.

G.lV. ity.

G.lV.

To directthe refund ofthe ptC amountpaid by the ComptainaDtl .tong with interest till the actual reallzatior of thc sao€, C.V.

To direcrthe Respondentno,l ard 2 ro.efund $e amouDt p.id towa.ds the area ln which shafi ts beiDg covered tn the unit, as derermtned by LC, along with interesL G.Vl.

To dlrect the RespoDdent to refund the ahount ofns 4,4g2 p.i.l by the Complainant towards tbe Labourcess charges, C.Vll.

To direct the Respoddenr to nor charges any ilteSatcharAes. c.vlll.

To dtrect RespoDdent no.

I and 2 to not chargJ raUour cess, electri fi.ation .ha rges, EEc and FFpBTC charges,as rhe sam;re ilteSat 32.

The respondenr shalt not cha.ge anything which is not the pan orthe aAe.

G,lX.To direct responden t no.

1 and 2 to €xecute the convevancedeed lJ A) per \e.lrun I I {4trn Jrd,ectron | -t l, or rhp Arr ot 20 t;. rhe promo(er r\ under an obligation ro get the conveyance deed executed in iavour of the complainant. whereas as pe. section 19(11) of the Act of 2016, th€ allott€e is also obligated to participate towards regjstration ofthe conveyance de€d ofthe unit in question.

As perthe interim order ofthe sole Arbitrator the said proiect has now been physically handed over to the respondent no.

2 and there is nothing on the record to show thatthe said respondent has applied ior occupation certificate or what is the status ot the completion of development of the above_mentioned proiect.

In view of the above, the respondent no.

2 is directed to handove. possession of the flat/unit and execute conveyance deed in favour of the complainant in terms of section 17(1) olthe Act o12016 on payment of stamp duty and registratron cha.ges as applicable, within th.ee months after obtaining occupation certificate from the co m petent authoriqT.

G.X.To peralise theRespondentno 3 urdersectloo 62 oftheActj G.xl.

T; penalise Respordert no.

1 and 2 for non'tubmlsslon ot BlP, and violation ot section 61 tor non-extenslon of re8lst atlon of the Prolect' 34. olect' 34.

The above mentioned reliefs were not pressed by the complainant dunng the course ofargument.

H.

DlrectionsoltheauthoritY 35.

Hence, the authoriry hereby passes this order and issues the iollowing directrons under section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligaoons cast upon the promoteras per the function entrusted to the authority under section 34[01 a.

The respondents/promoters jointlv and severallv are directed to pav interest at the prescribed rate of 11.10% p a. for every month of delav fronr due dat. of possession ie., 13.02 2022 till the date ofvalid offer ol possession plus 2 months aiter obtain ing occupation certificate from th e competent authoriry or actual handing over ofpossession, whichever is *HARER., S crnrcnevr Complarnt No.

2794 of 2021 earlier; atprescribed rate j.e.,11.10olo p.a. as perproviso to section 18[t) oflhe Ad read wjth rutc tS otthe rutes. b.

The respondent no.

2 is directed ro hand over rhe actual physicat possessron of the unit ro rhe comptainanrs wirhin 2 months afte. obtaining occupation certificate and thereafrer execute conveyance deed in favoroicomplainantwirhin 3 monrhs irom thedate ofobtaininS occupation certiiicate. c The rare oi interest chargeable from the altottees by the promoter, in case ofdefault shallbe charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 11.10% by the respondent/promorer which js the same rate ot interest which the promoter shall be tiable to pay the allottees, in case of defautt i.e.. the delayed possess,on charges as per section 2(za) oitheAct. d.

The complainants are d,rected to pay oursranding dues, it any, after adjustment ofinrerest for the delayed period. e.

The respondents are directed ro pay arrears ofinte.est accrued within 90 days irom rhe date oforderofthis orderas per.ule 16[2] otthe rules. t The respondent shall not charge anything which is nor the part ofBBA.

35.

Complaint stands disposed of.

37.

Pile be consigned ro registry. registry. (Ashok s \t --*) (viiay Kuifiarcoyall *HARERA S eunuennu Complai.t No.

27'r4 otZO23 _p.t,/-w. (Arun Kumar) wrn) Page 32 ui33 *HARERA #- Grnrcn,clt/ I cohplaint No.2794 or,:! ) Haryana RealEstate Regulatory Au tho riq,, Curugram Datedr13.05.2o2s