DEEPAK SETIA AND SURBHI SETIA vs ST. PATRICKS REALTY PVT.LTD.

l;rnplr,* N"lrrs "f ,013 BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGUIATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Deepak Setia Surbhi Setia Both R/O,; Bt/202, Delhi-110085 Sunshine Apartment, Rohini, Complainants Versus Respondent CORAM: Shri Sanjeev Kumar Arora Member APPEARANCE: Sh.

Sanat Garg(AdvocateJ omplainants Sh.

Venket Rao (AdvocateJ I Respon d en t ORDER The present complaint has been filed by the complainants/allottecs under Section 31 ofthe Real Estate (Regulation and DevelopmcntJ Act, 2016 (in short, the Act) read with rule 2g of the Haryana Real l.istato (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (in short, the Rules) for violation of section 11(4J (aJ of the Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provision oIthe Act or thc rulcs and regulations made there under or to the allottee as per thc agreement for sale executed inter se.

Unit and proiect related details C 1,.

Complaint no.

Date of Filine Comolaint: 7995 of 2O23 02.o5.2023 Date of Decisionl 03.11.2023 St.

Patrick Realty pvt.

Ltd.

Office at: The Median, Central park Resort, Off Sohna Road, Sector-48, Gurugram-Haryana A.

PaBe 1 ol 18 HARERA M" GURUGRAM The particulars of the projec! the details of sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainants, date of proposed handing over the possession and delay period, ifany, have been detailed in the following tabular form: ark 32, pto leavor to the said within a lce period n the datc Pagc 2 ol lB Complaint No.

1995 of 202 3 Z. s.

N.

Particulars Details 1.

Name and location of the proiect "Lake Front Towers at Central P Flower Valley" situated at sector- Gurgaon 2.

Nature of the project Group Housing Colony 3.

Project area 10.92 5 acres 4.

DTCP license no.

84 of 2014 dated 09.08.2014 valid u 08.0a.2024 5.

Name of licensee Ravinder Singh-Balkaran-Viiay 6.

Unit no.

1104, 11,h floor, Tower G (As per page no.

54 of complaintJ 7.

Unit area admeasuring (super areaJ 2134 sq. ft.

34 sq. ft. (As per page no.

54 of complaint) 8.

Date ofapartment buyer agreement 26.07.2077 (Page no.

53 of complaint) 9.

Tripartite agreement March 2018 (Page no.

85 of complaint) 7.

Possession 7.1 The Company shall endeavor handover the possession of the s: Apartment to the Allottee within period of 36 months with a grace peri ofanother 6 (six) months from the di 10.

Possession clause #HARERA #- eunuennnr Compla inr No.

1995 of 202.1 of the Agreement suUpa io trmcfy payment of sale price, other charges details of payment, payment plan and all other payments as per the terms of this Agreement including payment ol interest by the Allotree(s).

26.01..2021 (calculated from the date of agreement including grace period of 6 months) Rs.

7,74,92,870 / - (page no.

113 of complaint) Rs.

L,57,39,236/- 113 of complaint) RS.

L,t4,67,240 /- (page no.

1 14 of complaint) Rs.

I ,20 ,7 5 ,684 / - (page no.

113 complaintl no.

52 of reply,) 'L6.02.2023 (page no.

106 of complaintl Facts ofthe complaint: 3.

That the complainants after believing the respondent appiied lor a residential apartment ad_measuring 2134 sq. ft., at a total basic selling price of Rs.

1,,14,92,870/_ by making paymenr of Rs.

17,84, 266/ vitlc cheque bearing number 33 2 704.

Due date of possession Basic Sale Consideration 6r Amount paid by complainants the Occupation certificate Offer of possession (:t tpt Page 3 o, 18 B.

14.

4..

HARERA GUl?UGRAM That the respondent issued a,, I Comptainr No.

199s of2023 ] provisional allotment letter,, dated 25.07.2017 in favour of the complainants allotting the apartment no.

1104 in tower G ofthe project.

In this provisional allotment letter dated 25.07.2017 ,t has been duly recorded and it is matter of record thar thc complainants opted for the subvention payment plan with respecr ro the unit, in lieu of offering subvention pavment plan to thc complainants, the respondent herein charged a higher base selling price/ total selling price along with dedicated subvention charges tro harges tronl the complainants herein.

That subsequently an apartment buyers agreemen t dated 27 .o7.2017 was executed between the complainants and respondent.

As pcr clalrso 1.3 of the ABA dat ed 27 .07 .2017 , the complainants were liable to n)akc various additional payments over and above the total basc sclling p rrct of the unit.

That as per clause 7.1 of the ABA dated 22.07.2017, the responclcnr were liable to deliver the physical possession of the unit in 36 months from the date of signing of the ABA dated 27.07.2017 which comcs our to be 27 .07 .2020.

That to fulfil their obligation under the ABA dated 27.O7.2Oj7, tl)c complainants availed a Ioan facility for Rs.

1,14,43,500/_ fronr thc financial institution namely Indiabulls Housing F-inance Limitcd ancl accordingly a tripartite agreement dated 16.03.201g was executcd between the indiabulls housing finance limited, the complainants and the respondent.

That it has been duly recorded in the tripartitc agreement dated 16.03.2019, that the respondent as pcr the subvcntlon scheme and admission, shall be liable to pay the EMI against thc said availed loan.

7.

6.

5. t'agc 4 ol .l t] # HARERA ffi eunGnnvr That from period 2021 to 2023 the complainants k"pt on *qririrg o, multiple occasions from the respondent regarding the handing over of B.

9. the physical possession of the unit, and the respondent admittedly on one hand showed their inability to hand over the physical possession because of project being in an incomplete stage and on the other hand the respondent herein arways provided with the farse assuranccs that the possession will be handed over in a month or two.

That the complainants paid a total sumof Rs.

I,27,3g,370/_onaregutar basis and contacted the respondent regarding the project status, whereby the respondent arways provided farse assurances, that th.. project is near completion and the possession will very soon be handccl over, but the same till date has been not handed over.

That on 16.02. on 16.02.2023, the respondent issued a letter whereby the respondent claimed that it has obtained the occupational certjficate on 73.01.2023 for the tower consisting of the unit purchased by the complainants and further that the respondent ar€, ready to offcr thc possession of the unit to the complainants.

That in this letter dated 16.02.?023, the respondent provided paymcn ts components along with statement, as per which the respondent raiscd a demand of Rs.

36,63,553 from the complainants. l.he said demand raised by the respondent vide retter dated 16.02,2023 were ilegibre, wrongful and against the rights of the complainants.

That the respondent vide Ietter date d 16.02.2023 have raised a ciclra nd of Rs.

11,49,287 /- towards escalation cost from the period July, 201 7 to October'2021.

Such escalation cost clauses are part ofthe agreements to safeguard the builder or promoter from the changes occurred ovcr the period.

10.

12.

11.

Pagc 5 ol 18 Complaint No.

1995 of 2021 ffiHARERA *e.eunuennttr C.

Reliefsought by the complainants: t4.

15.

The complainants have sought following relief[sJ: (i) Direct the respondent to pay delayed charge at the prescribed rate ofinterest on the amount paid by the complainants till the hand ing over of the physical possession. (iiJ Direct the respondent to handover the physical possession of thc said apartment. (iii) Direct the respondent to pay the EMI or equivalent amount to thc complainants till the handing over the physical posscssion with respect to said unit.

Reply by respondent: The respondent by way of written reply made following submissions: That in the year 20-17, the complainants in search of a residential project learned about the proiect titled as ,Aqua !-ront,l'owers,being developed by the respondent over a piece of land admeasuring 10.925 Acres, situated at Sector 32, Tehsil Sohna, Gurugram, Haryana, India. na, India.

That after being satisfied with specif,ication and veracity of thc prolcLr the complainants booked an apartment vide appli(ation for provisronal allotment dated 27.06.2077, and paid an bool<ing amount of lls.

17,84,266/-.

That the respondent vide provisional allotment letter d ated 25.07 .2017 , provisionally allotted an apartment bearing no.

1104, Tower G, in thc aforesaid project admeasuring super area of 213,1sq. ft. having basjc sale price of Rs.

5385.60/- per sq. ft. in the said prc,iect.

1995 of 2023 13.

D.

16.

Page 6 of 1B ffiHARERA *e.eunuennnr That on 26.07.2017, an apartment buyer agreement was executcd for the said apartment having total basic sale price of Rs.

1,14,92,g701 excluding all other charges mentioned and agreed by the complainants under the agreement.

The said agreement was signcd [)y tht complainants voluntarily with free will and consent without any dcm ur.

That as per the provision of clause 7.1 of the agreement, the possession of the apartment was proposed to be offered within a period of 36 months along with a grace period of 6 months from the date of the agreement subject to other terms and conditions agreed undcr thc agreement including timely payment of instalments and as per the sa mr-. the possession was to be handed over on or before 25.01.2021 sublect to force majeure circumstances.

That the respondent is also entitled for the extensron of 6 montlls, t inr!, period on account of the delay so caused due to worldwidc sprcacl oI covid-19 spread, which the Ld.

Authority and other courts had considered as a force majeure circumstance and have allowed extension of 6 months to the promoters at large on account of delay so causcd as the same was beyond the control of the respondent.

F.urthcr, thc promoter is also entitled for 70 days extension till 2021 when construction was banned by NGT and EpCA. and EpCA.

After considering all force majeure circumstances and thc reasons beyond the control of the respondent company, the possession ol thL. unit in question was to be offered on or before OS.IO.2O2l.

That on 16.03.2018, a tripartite agreement (,,1.pA,,) was executed between the complainants, M/s Indiabulls Housing Finance Limitcd ("lHFL") and the respondent wherein, the complainants had availccl a loan facility of Rs.

1,14,43,500 /- against the apartment in question.

1995 of 202:l i 77.

18.

1.9.

20.

21,.

Page 7 of '18 ffiHARER^ S" eunuennu Complainr No.

1995 of 202:l I 22.

That in terms of clause 4 of the TpA, the respondent was under obligation to pay pre-EMI,s on behalfofthe complainants for the entirc liability period as enshrined under schedule I ofthe TpA.

23.

In view ofthe clause 4 read with schedule I ofthe TpA, the respondcnt was under obrigation to pay pre-EMI on beharf of the comprainants ti 30th June 2 020 only.

24 That the respondent in compriance with the above terms of thc TI)A. has already paid an amount of Rs.

71,90,62 7 / _ as pre-EMI without any dclay or defaulr, w.e.f 01.04.2018 till 30.06.2020, on behall ot rhe complainants and the same was compensatory in nature.

25.

That even after being aware ofthe payment schedule the complainants had delayed the instalments and owing to such default the responclcnt herein was constrained to issue intimation of payment due letter datcd 05.07.201,8, calling upon the complainants to pay an outstanding amount of Rs.27,94,253/_ due as per the subvention paymcnt plan opted by the complainants which was required to bc paid Lry 20.07.2078.

However, the complainants failed to pay thc samc within stipulated period.

26.

That upon not receiving the outstanding instalment, respondent, on 13.06.2019, was constrained to send a letter for payment ofinstalmcnt due and requested the complainants to pay an amount ol Rs.

28,29,685/- as per the payment schedule which was payable by 20.06.2019.

0.06.2019.

However, the complainants deliberately delayed rhe payment and failed to pay the same within stipulated period of timc.

27.

That the respondent herein had raised an intimation of payment duc letter dated 27.01.2027, calling upon the complainants ro pay thc instalment of Rs.

2g,gg,769/_ due upon completion ol plaster which was Page I of 18 C".plrl", tl" 1rr5 "f r0L l payable by 1,0.02.2021.

However, the complainants again delayed thc 28.

29.

30.

31.

32. ffiHARERA #" eunuennnr said payment.

That the complainants herein had voluntarily agreed to other torms ;rn d conditions such as the provision of clause 1.13 of the agreement the complainants had agreed to pay the escalation cost.

Further as per the provision of clause 8.2 of the agreement tht. complainants upon own free will and consent had agreed to pay thr. maintenance charges including charges for water as per maintenancc bills raised by the maintenance agency/company for maintain thc common areas and facilities as mentioned in clause 9.1, from the datc ofoffer of possession irrespective of the fact that whether the allottcc(s) actually has taken over the possession of the said apartment or not In accordance, with clause 19 of the agreement the respondent hcrcil.t was entitled for the extension ofperiod for handing over the possessron of the said apartment to the complainants for the delayed period and the complainants agreed that they shall not be entitled to any clainr. compensation for such delay.

That the respondent herein has already completed thc projcct in question and had received occupation certificate on 13.0l.20211, frorr the Directorate ofTown and Country planning Haryana (D'l.Cp), for thc respective tower wherein, the apartment of the complainants was situated.

That in view of the occupation certificate the respondent vide offcr oi possession letter dated 16.02. ted 16.02.2023, had offered possession to thc complainants and informed that respondent company has commenccd with the process ofhanding over the possession ofall the apartnlcnts in the project 'aqua front tower'.

Page 9 of 1B *HARERA ffi aJRucRAr,/ E.

35.

Complaint No, t995 of 2023 33.

That vide same offer of possession letter dated 16.02.2023, thc respondent even called upon the complainants to pay the balancc amount of Rs.

36,63,553/- due upon offer of possession along with details statement of accounts of the complainants.

34.

Copies of all the relevant documents have been filed and placecl on record.

Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the complaint can be decided on the basis of these undisputed documents and submission made by the parties. lurisdiction of the authority: The authority has territorial as well as subject matter jurjsdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given below.

E.

I Territorial iurisdiction As per notification no. "l /92 /2077 -1TCP dated 14.12.2017 issued by Town and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of Real Dstatc Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gurugram District for all purpose with offices situated in Gurugram.

In the present case, the project in question is situated within the planning area of Gurugrant district.

Therefore, this authority has complete territorial jurisdiction to deal with the present complaint.

E. ll Subiect matter iurisdiction Section 11(4)(aJ of the Act, 20L6 provides that the promoter shall be responsible to the allottee as per agreement fo r sale.

Sectio n 1 1 [4 )( a ) is reproduced as hereunder; Section 77(4)(a) Be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities a,1d functions under the provisions of this Act or the rules ond regulotions mode thereunder or to the allottees os per the ogreement fot sole, or to the ossociation ofollottees, as the case moy be, till Lhe 36.

37.

Page 10 oi I B ffi IARERA P* eunuennu Complaint No. plaint No.

1995 ot 2023 | conveyonce ofoll the opartments, plots or buildings, as the cose mqy be, to the ollottees, or the common oreos to the association ofallottees or the competent outhority, qs the case moy be; Section 3 4- Functions of the Authorityr 34(j) ofthe Act provides to ensure complionce of the obligotions cast upon the promoters, the ollottees and the real estote agents under this Act ond the rules ond regulotions made thereuncler.

38.

So, in view ofthe provisions ofthe Act quoted above, the authority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non compliance of obligations by the promoter leaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by thc complainants at a later stage.

F.

Entitlementofthecomplainants: (iJ Direct the respondent to pay delayed charge at the prescribed rate of interest on the amount paid by the complainants till the handing ovor of the physical possession. (iiJ Direct the respondent to handover the physical possession of the said apartment.

39.

In the present complaint, the compiainants intends to continuc wjth thc project and is seeking delay possession charges as provided undcr the proviso to section 18[1) ofthe Act.

Sec.

18[1) proviso reads as undcr. "Section 78: - Retum oI qmount qnd compensotion 18(1). lf the promoter fails to complete or is unoble tc Aive possession ol on qporlment. ploL. or bulding, - Provided thot where an allottee does not intend to withdrow from the project, he shall be paid, by the promotet, interest for every month of delay, till the hqnding over of the possession, at such roLc as moy be prescribed." 40.

Clause 7 of the buyer's agreement provides the time period of handing over possession and the same is reproduced belorv: Page 11 ol 'l B *u\RERA ^m- eunuennM 41.

The authority has gone through the possession clause ofthe agreemcnt. agreemcnt.

At the outset, it is relevant to comment on the pre_set possession clausc ofthe agreement wherein the possession has been subiected to all kinds of terms and conditions of this agreement and the complainants not being in default under any provision of this agreement and in compliance with aI provisions, formalities and documentation as prescribed by the promoter.

The drafting o' this crause anrJ incorporation ofsuch conditions is not only vague and uncertain but so heavily loaded in favour of the promoter and against the allottee that even a singre defaurt by the alrottee in furfiling formarities and documentations etc. as prescribed by the promoter may makc the possession clause irrelevant for the purpose ol allottee and the commitment date for handing over possession loses its meanrng.

42 The buyer's agreement is a pivotal regal document which should ensurc that the rights and liabilities of both builder/pronrorcr .rIld buyer/allottee are protected candidly.

The apartment buycr,s agreement lays down the terms that govern the sare of different ki.cls of properties like residentials, commercials etc. betr^,een the buycr and builder.

It is in the interest of both the parties to have a well_draftcrl apartment buyer,s agreement which would thereby protect the rights of both the builders and buyers in the unfortunate event of a disputc that may arise.

It should be drafted in the simple and unambiguous language which may be understood by a common mar.t with an ordinary educational background.

It should contain a provision with rcgard to page l2 ol I u Complaint No.

19gS ot 2023 I "7.

Possession 7.1 The.Company shall endeovor to handover the possession ol t!::a:d Apartme:t .to the Altottee within a period'ot' l6 montils llt.n !-llare ryrn!.ot another 6 (six) monLns Jro. tt," iiLi o1 ,:,"-:Sn"f*!, subject to timely pqyment of sole prir" orinu:, cna. inu:, cna.rges _detoils ol poyment, payment plon oni oll other pa-yments os per the terms ofthis Agreement including poyment ofinterest by the Allottee(s)...

HARERA ffi"GURUGRAM Complaint No.

1995 of 202 3 stipulated time of delivery of possession of the apartment, plot or building, as the case may be and the rights ofthe buyer/allottees in casc of delay in possession of the unit.

43.

Admissibility of delay possession charges at prescribed rate of interest: The complainant[sJ are seeking dela1, possession chargcs.

However, proviso to section 1B provides that where an allottcc cloes not intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be paid, by the promotcr, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of possessron, a r such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rulc 15 ofthe rules.

Rule 15 has been reproduced as under: Rule 15.

Prescribed rqte of interest- lproviso to section lZ, section 78 and sub-section {4) ond subsection (Z) oI section 191 (1) For the purpose of proviso to section 12; settioi 1B;andsub- sections [4) and (7) ofsection 19, the,,interest at tht rate prescribecl', shall be the State Bqnk of lndio highest marginol cast of lending rote +2 o/o.: Provided thot in cose the Stote Bonk oflndio morgir,al cost of lendtnll rate (\4CLR) is not in use, it sholl be reploced by such benchmurk lending rates which the State Bonk of tndio may lix from time to time for lending to the general public.

44.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the provision ofrule 15 ofthe rules, has determined the prescribed ratc of interest.

The rate of interest so determined by the legislaturc, is reasonable and ifthe said rule is followed to award the interest, it will ensure uniform practice in all the cases.

45.

Consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i.c., hups://sbi.co.in. the marginal cost of lending rate (in short, MCLRI as on date i.e., 03.11,.2023 is 8.75o/o. s 8.75o/o.

Accordingly, the prescribed ratc of interest will be marginal cost of lending rate +Zo/o i.e., 10.75% pcr annum.

46.

The definition of term'interest'as defined under section 2(za] ofthe Act provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the allottec by thc Page 13 ()1 1B HARERA CURUGRAM promoter, in case ofdefault, shall be equal to the rate of in**\/l/n,.n the promoter shalr be liable to pay the alottee, in case of defaurt. ,r.hc Complaint No.

1995 of2021i 1 relevant section is reproduced below; ,.(zo) "interest,,meons the rotes.ofinterest poyQb!e by the promoter or Lhe olloltee. os rhe cose may be_ , t -".- _) .,t\ pt ._, Explonation. _For the purpose ofthis clquse_ (i) the rote of interest charg-eoble J,rom theallotteeby the promoter, tn cose of defoutt, sha ,be equat .to ,n" ,o* iJ.iriri{r, "*,i,rn ,n" promoter sholl be lioh tir) ;;;,;;;;";i;;nz;',:;;,;?;il;ii::,:,:,;?;i,::,:;.!^Xil,ui,;;.,,0" tlote the promoter rir l:i;tz j,l[ii,iirii::;!;;frix''.i:::ir?,:::"':it,:::;T ,n" a"r" ,i" ,irii!""ili bv the ollottee to the pt omotpr \hattbt tt ont tt is paid;" 'joults in poyment Io the promoLer titl the dLtle 47.

Therefore, interest on the be charged,,,n" r."11'il:;':::"::'iH;T]':;'T: respondent/promoter which is the same as is being granted to thc complainants in case of delay possession charges.

48.

On consideration ofthe documents available on record and submissions made regarding contravention of provisions of the Act, the authority is satisfied that the respondent is in contravention of the section I t (4J Ia] of the Act by not handing over possession by the due date as pc,r thc agreement.

By virtue of clause 7.1 of the buyer,s agreement cxccutcd between the parties, the possession of the sub,ect allartment was to be delivered within a period of 36 months with a grace period of anothcr 6 months from the date of the agreement.

As such the duc datc of handing over of possession comes o ut to be 26.01.2(t21.

49.

2(t21.

Section 19(10) of the Act obligates the allottee to take possession ofrhc subiect unit within 2 months from the date of receipt ol occupatron certificate.

In the present compraint, the occupation ccrtificatc \\,as granted by the competent authority on 13.01.2023.The respondcnt has offered the possession of the subject unit(s) to the respectjve page 14 ol 18 l ffiHARERA *e-eunuennrr,r Complainr No.

1995 ot 202 r ] complainants after obtaining occupation certificate from competent authority.

Therefore, in the interest of natura I justice, the complainan rs should be given 2 months,time from the date ofoffer ofpossession.

Th is 2 months' ofreasonable time is being given to the complainants kceping in mind that even after intimation of possession practically hc has tir arrange a lot of logistics and requisite documents including but not limited to inspection of the completely finished unit but this is subjcct to that the unit being handed over at the time of taking possession is irr habitable condition.

It is further clarified that the delay posscssion charges shal be payable from the due date of possessio n i.e.,26.01 .2021 till the expiry of 2 months from the date of offer of possession (1 6.02.2023) plus two months (i.e., 16.04.2023).

50.

Accordingly, it is the failure ofthe promoter to fulfil its obligations and responsibilities as per the apartment buyer,s agreement to hand over the possession within the stipulated period.

A<.cordingly, the non_ compliance of the mandate contained in section 11(4)(aJ rcad with proviso to section 1g(1) of the Act on the part of the respondent is established.

As such, the allottees shall be paid, by the promotcr, interest for every month of delay from due date of possession i.c., 26.01.2021till offer of possession plus rwo months (i.e., 16.04.202:l), at the prescribed rate i.e., 10.75 o/o p.a. as per proviso to scction .ltJ[1 ) ot the Act read with rule 15 of the rules. the rules. (iii) Direct the respondent to pay the EMI or equivalent amount to thc complainants till the handing over the physical possession with respect to said unit.

51.

A tripartite agreement [,,TpA,,) builder and financial institution was executed between the allottcc, in March 2018.

The allottees havc Page 15 ol lB ffi HARERA *e. eunuennM alleged that builder shall pay all institution till offer of possession. the Pre-EMIs/EMI,s to the financiat 52.

The relevant clause of the tripartite agreement is clause 4 and is reproduced hereunder for ready reference: The Borrower has informed :HFL obout the schcmp .f otronqement bctween the Borrower ond the srit,t.i ," )).;, whereof rhe Buitder hereby ogn", ,. pry ii""'i ii,,,,lriZ,/*), poyoble by rhe Borroqer rc tHFL durio ,n" ,.r,,").)),u) referred to as the .Liobiltty eeriod: 1r'oln it,"riai""iri!, dtsbursement of toon locttiry til J0;" tu;ne 2;)0 i,i," ,il ul,i,l,)" period t5 referred to os ,Assuned Liobittry [or ri; ;;,;o;;:i;;7. however op reed thot during the I io bili6l p:;;,;;r;;;;;;lr: ; :f ossumed lnbtlity is loint and severol by and b,,:r*ron.ti. dorrower ond lhe Bulder.

The assumption of tiatittt"-t "i.i) Builder in no monner *noLro"r", ,"t"o["r, ,";ir;;;;;;:r" r;;),;i re!::-es,rhe tiobilia o[the Borrower ond thot ,o." ,noi ,lLin u (Lteu tn onv menner on occount of ony dilJereut e ond/or dispute between the Borrower rra, ri/ ,iriii"i, riiir"rr"i" arrangement between them.

53.

Similarly the Schedule I ofthe tripartite agreement is also relevant and reproduced hereunder for ready reference: Detalls ofthe Subverrtion Scheme LiabiliU Period sholl mein ond Complaint No.

1995 of 2023 Llability Period (Defi nitioiJ Duration of LiabilityTeriod Subvention period Commencement of the scheme- End ofthe scheme include the liobility ossumed bv the Developer on occount ,r[ interest poyable b). the Borrower to IHFL Broken Period, ifany (disbursJ in mid of monthl lune 30, 2020 nom ttl *rt" first disbursal From 01.04. rom 01.04.2 018 to n.G.ZctiO 01.04.2018 30.o6.2020 Page 16 ol 1B HARERA ffi GURUGRAM [@4i,1 54.

However, a bare perusal of clause 4 of the TpA and schedule I makcs is apparent that the liability ofthe builder for paying the pre EMI is fronl the date of disbursal till 30.06.2020.

The date of first disbursal is 0104'2018 so, the buirder wi, pay pre Emi fr.om 01.04.20rt, riri 30.06.2020.

55.

Therefore, the authority cannot read the terms of the TpA outside its express meaning until and unless there is an), ambiguity in the agreement.

In view of the same, comprainants are not entitled for thc said relief.

H.

Directions ofthe Authority: 56.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this order and issue the following directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoters as per the functions entrusted to the Authority under Section 34(0 of the Act of 2016: i) The respondent is directed to handover physical possession of thc subject unit within 60 days from the date of this o rder as occupation certificate of the project has arready been obtained by it from thc competent authority. iil The complainants are ent the proviso of section ,itled to delaYed possession charges as per Developmentr act, 2016 of the Real Estate [Regulation and at the prescribed rate of interest r.c., 10.750/op.a. for every month of delay on the amount paid by him to page l7 of tB oate of io iircuiint or=_- Borrower's liability to pay pre- EMI/EMI interest on Balance term oflaon From 01.O2.2020 HABEBA ffiGUI?UGRAM Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Cr',iug."rn the respondent from the due r.," "rr*ff:, ,;#;:1,,,1, the offer of the possession i.e., 16.02.2023 plus two months i.e., till 76.04.2023 as per the provisions of section j.8(11 of the Acr read with ruie 15 ofthe rules. iii) Also, the amount of Rs.71,g0,667 /_ so paid by the respondent towards pre-EMI shall b, ch a rges to o " or,, o,,n " .*r'Jr::l J:J::: rt::;H # ::::, :: 18(1) ofthe Act. ofthe Act. iv) The promoter shall not c buyer's agreemen, 'n"t" anything which is not part of thc vJ The respondent is directed to pay arrears ofinterest accrued, ifany after adjustment in staten date orthis order,, r"..J';?:i'"'#'J:::'' t' davs rrom the vil The rate of interest chargeable from the allottees by the promoter, in case ofdefault shall be cl by th e res p o n de ",rr.",;":;1 ;i: T: :::"j .l il'; ll J.l'j which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottees, in casc ol defauit i.e., the delayed possession charges as per section 2[za) of the Act Complaint stands disposed of.

File be consigned to the registry.

58. uEfar Arora) Member Dated:03.11.2023 Page 18 ol .l8