AKSHAY RALHAN vs RAMPRASTHA ESTATES PVT. LTD.

HARERA ffiGURUGRAII BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM ORDER 1.

The present complaint dated 16.02.2023 has been filed by the complainant/allottees under section 31 ofthe Real Estate (Regulation and Developmentl Act, 2016 (in short, the ActJ read with rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules,2017 (in short, the Rules) for violation of section 11(4)(a) of the Act wherein it is inrer ala prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, res*ponsibilities and functions under the provision of the Act or the Rules and regulations made there under or to the allottee as per the agreement for sale executed inter se.

Complaint No.

596 of 2023 Akshay Ralhan R/o: E-19-B, MIG FIats, Mayapuri Versus M/s Ramprashtha Estate private Limired Ofiice at: Plor no.

114, Sector- 44, Gurugram- 722002 CORAM: Shri Arun Kumar Shri Vijay Kumar Goyal Shri Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCEI Shri K.K.Kohli, (Advocate) Shri Sougat Sinha (Advocate) Complaint no. : Date ofdecision : 596 ol2023 13.oa.2024 Complainant Respondent Chairman Member Member Complainant Respondent Page a of 22 HARERA HGURUGRAN/ A.

2.

596 of 2023 Unit and proiect related details The particulars of unit details, sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainant, date of proposed handing over the possession, delay period, ifany, have been detailed in the following tabular form: S.

No.

Particulars Details 1.

Name and location ofthe proiect "Ramprastha City" & Sector,92,93 and 95, Gurugram 2.

Project area Cannot be ascertained 3.

DTCP license no. and validiry status ++ of 2010 dated 09.06.2010 valid up to 08.06.2016 4.

RERA Registered/ not registered GGM/397 /129/2020/73 dated 05.06.2020 valid up to 37.12.2024 5 Plot no.

Not Allotted 6 Unit area admeasuring 300 sq. yds. [Page no.

30 of the complaint) 7.

Date of issuing preliminary allotment of the plot 01.o3.2012 fPage no.

30 ofthe complaintJ B. plaintJ B.

Date of execution of plot buyer's agreement Not executed 9.

Possession clause Not applicable 10 Due date ofpossession Cannot be ascertained Page 2 ol 22 ffilaRERA # euRuennlr B.

3.

596 of 2023 Facts ofthe complaint The complainant has made the following submissions in the complaintl i.

That the complainant being aggrieved with the conduct of the respondent of not executing the builder buyer agreement and not completing the development of the said plot within the agreed period, are seeking redressal oftheir grievances and direction upon the respondent to hand over the possession of the said plot along with penalty for delayed possession of the said plot at the rate of 180/o per annum. ii.

That the respondent approached the complainant and represented them the details ofthe said proiect. lt was represented that the said project would offer independent plots to its allottees with perfect planning, extraordinary standards, and real estate development division in observation of their top professionals.

The respondent had also assured to the complainant that they have obtained all 1,1,.

Total sale consideration Rs.49,00,000/- (As alleged by the complainant in his fact at page no.

26 of complaintJ t2.

Amount paid by the complainant Rs.49,00,000/- fPage no.

31 ofthe complaint) 13.

Occupation Certificate Not obtained 14 Offer ofpossession Not offered Page 3 of 22 *HARERA H eunuerunrr lll Complaint No.

596 of 20Z3 necessary government permission and statutory approval for the development of the said project at that particular point of time itself, hence, there won't be any unnecessary delay occurring in the course for development of the said proiect.

Considering the respondent expertise and wherewithal the complainant was inclined to jointly apply for the allotment ofthe said plot.

That subsequently, the complainant made the payment of Rs.49,00,000/- vide cheque bearing no.

431070 dated 29.02. ted 29.02.2012 as total consideration for the allotment of the said unit.

On receipt of the aforesaid payment the respondent issued a payment receipt bearing no.2286 dated 01.03.2012.

That the respondent thereafter issued the provisional allotment letter dated 01.03.2012 for the plot admeasuring 300 square yards in the said project, assuring the complainant that they would be preferably executing builder buyer agreement soon and the as assured the possession of the said plot would be handed over by the respondent within agreed time.

It is pertinent to mention that in general scenario the possession of such independent plot is to be handed over within the time span of 3 years from the respective date of its allotment.

However, in the present case even after a lapse of almost B years from the tentative due date of handing over the physical possession, the respondent had deliberately abandoned the development of the said projecr and did not proceed for the development of the said plot, even till date.

Page 4 of22 ffiHARERA # eunuennl,l Complaint No.

596 of20Z3 That complainant were assured by the respondent that the possession ofthe said plot would be delivered / handed over as per the time agreed befween the parties, however, even after lapse of g years, the respondent had miserably failed to offer the possession of the said plot in the habitable area to the complainant in the said proiect.

That despite receiving the total consideration amounting to Rs.49,00,000/- for the allotment of the said plot, the respondent had miserably failed to offer possession even till date.

It is pertinent to mention that, when the complainant visited the site of the said project, to the utter shock on the part of the complainant, the said project was left abandoned by the respondent and there was no sign of development whatsoever.

Moreover, site of said project was a barren land and there was no provision for electricity, no demarcation ofany plots, no securify, no sewage system, etc. stem, etc.

That the complainant, thereafter, approached the respondent on several occasions for the execution of the builder buyer agreement and enquire about the date ofactual delivery of physical possession of the said plot, as the agreed time period has already been lapsed and the project development is not even near to its completion.

Hence, the respondent had asked for some more time to deliver the possession and later assured the complainant after passing of several occasions that the builder buyer agreement would be executing very soon and also development of the said project would vi vii.

Page S of 22 HARERA GURUGRAM complainr No.

596 of 2023 definitely be completed soon.

Therefore, in bona fide intention to receive the possession of the said plot without any hindrances and disputes, the complainant had agreed to wait and decided to hold up and grant the additional time sought by the respondent for rhe completion of the said project. viii.

That as per the assurances of the respondent, the complainant again approached the respondent on several occasions.

Upon enquiring about the status for delivery of possession of the said plot, the respondent was still unable to provide any reasonable justification to the complainant for non-execution of builder buyer agreement and their failure of deliver the possession of the said plot and fufther sought, some more time from the complainant stating that due to some unforeseen circumstances the development ofthe said project is not completed. ix.

That complainant had thereafter again approached the respondent 1\ Aptil,2022 for executing the builder buyer agreement and other statutory documents and taking the possession of the said plot, however, the same were of no avail as the respondent was still Iingering the complainant and giving them false assurances time and again to execute the builder buyer agreement and other statutory documents and hand over the physical possession in near future. ar future.

The aforesaid acts of the respondents clearly indicates the intentional delay and mala fide intent of not providing the possession ofthe said plot and keep lingering on the complainant.

Page 6 of Zz ffiuaRERA HeunueRnlr xt.

596 of 2023 It is pertinent to mention that respondent have miserably failed to handover the possession of the said plot within the agreed time period, despite being in receipt of total consideration from the complainant, respondent have played a fraud upon the complainant and have cheated them fraudulently and dishonestly with a false promise to complete the construction over the proiect site within stipulated period.

Hence, the complainant being aggrieved by the offending misconduct, fraudulent activities, deficiency and failure in service ofthe respondent is filing the present complaint That the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Fortune Infrastructure and Ors. vs.

Trevor D'Lima and Ors. (12.03.201g - SCI; MANU/SC/0253/2018 observed rhat "a person cannot be made to wait indefinitely for the possession of the flats allotted to them and they are entitled to seek refund of the amount paid by them, along with compensation.

Although we are aware of the fact that when there was no delivery period stipulated in the agreement, a reasonable time has to be taken into consideration. ln the facts and circumstances of this case, a time period of 3 years would have been reasonable for completion ofthe contract." In view of the abovementioned reasoning, the date of issuance of allotment letter, ought to be taken as the date for calculating due date of possession.

Further, it was promised by the respondent that the possession will be handed over within a period of a year. xll.

PaEe 7 of 22 HARERA GURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

596 of 2023 However, the same promise was not executed in the form of an agreement. xiii. ent. xiii.

That That the Respondent is guilry of deficiency in service within the purview of provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Ac.,201,6 and the provisions of Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and DevelopmentJ Rules,2017.

The Complainant have suffered on account of deficiency in service by the Respondent and as such the Respondent is fu[y liable to cure the deficiency as per the provisions of the Real Estate IRegulation and DevelopmentJ Act, 2016 and the provisions of Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and DevelopmentJ Rules, 2017. xiv.

That the complainant is entitled to get delay possession charges with interest at the prescribed rate from date of application/ payment till rhe realization of money under section 1B & 19[4] of Act.

The complainant is also entitled to any other relef to which this Hon'ble Authority finds them entitled. xv.

The complainant after losing all hope from the Respondent Company, having their dreams shattered of owning a flat & having basic necessary facilities in the vicinity of the 'Ramprastha City, Project and also losing a considerable amount, are constrained to approach this Hon'ble Authorify for redressal oftheir grievance 4.

Reliefsought by the complainant: The complainant have sought following relief(s]: PageS of 22 HARERA H GURUGRAIV Complaint No.

596 of 2023 I.

Direct the respondent to provide necessary details of the plot including plot number, lane number, and other relevant information of 300 sq. yard plot which has been allotted vide allotment letter dated 01.03.2012 and handover the possession of the plot admeasuring 300 Square yards at Ramprastha City situated at Sector-92, 93 & 95, Gurugram, Haryana to the complainant, completely developed as per the de6nition of 'External and Internal Development'as enshrined the provisions of section 2 in the said Act after obtaining the occupation certifi cate/completion certificate. rtificate.

IL Direct the respondent to execute BBA for the unit in questiol in favour of complainant.

III.

Direct the respondent to register a conveyance deed in favour of complainant.

IV.

Direct the respondent to pay the delayed possession penalty at the rate of 180/0 per annum on the entire amount paid by the complainant to the respondent.

V.

Direct the respondent not to charge anything which complainant is not legally bound to pay.

On the date of hearing, the autho ty explained to the respondent/promoter about the contraventions as alleged to have been committed in relation to section 11(4J (a) of the Act to plead guilty or not to plead guilty.

Reply by the respondent: D.

PaEe I of Zz HARERA RGURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

596 of2023 6.

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

That the complainant has approached the respondent in the year 2012 to invest in the future potential project of the respondent named "Ramprastha Cify', located in Sector 92 and Sector 95, Gurugram against which a tentative registration was issued after receipt of a paymenr of Rs.49,00,000/- for booking a plot of 300 sq. yds. and it was also mentioned that a specific plot number shall be earmarked once the zoning plans have been approved by the concerned authorities.

The complainant has been made clear about the terms and conditions at the time of booking of the plot itself. ii.

That the complainant has paid an amount of Rs.49,0 0,000/_ for plot which is part or total consideration of the plot.

It is submitted that the said payments were not full and final payments and further payments inter alia towards government dues on account of EDC/IDC charges are payable at the time of allotment of plot and execution of plot buyer agreement. iii.

That further no date of possession has ever been mutually agreed between the parfies. e parfies.

That even at the time of booking, it has been clearly stated that a definite plot can be earmarked only once the zoning plans are approved by the Authority which is within the knowledge of the complainant. iv.

That there is no obligation on the part ofthe respondent to allot or handover any plot to the complainant since the complainant has PaEe 70 of 22 HARERA GURUGRAI\/ Complaint No.

596 of 2023 failed to provrde any evidence of execution of plot buyer,s agreement in her favour.

That the complainant was never interested in fulfilling rhe necessary formalities towards booking of the said plot Neither the complainant has made any further payment for plot as such in "Ramprastha City" nor did she submit any application for the same.

It is apparent that the complalnant never turned up for the completion of the formalities.

That That on the specific request of the complainant, the investment was accepted towards a futuristic project and no commitment was made towards any date of handover or possession since such date was not foreseeable or known even to the respondent.

The respondent had no certain schedule for the handover or possession since there are various hurdles in a futuristic project and hence no amount was received/demanded from the complainant towards development charges, EDC/lDC etc., but the complainant was duly informed that such charges shall be payable as and when demands will be made by the government.

That the complainant cannot be said to be genuine consumer by any standards; rather she is a mere investor in the futuristic project of the respondent.

An investor by any extended interpretation cannot mean to fall within the definition of a "Consumer,, under the Consumer Protection Act,2019.

Therefore, the complaint is liable to be dismissed merely on this ground. vl. vlt.

PaEe 7l of 22 HARERA MGURUGRAI,I 7.

596 of 2023 viii.

2023 viii.

That the complainant is not entitled to claim possession as claimed by her as the present complaint is clearly rime barred.

It is submitted that the complainant has itself not come forward to execute the buyer's agreement and hence cannot now push the entire blame onto the respondent for the same.

The obiections to the same were to be raised in a time bound manner. ix.

That there is no averment in the complaint which can establish that any so-called delay in possession could be attributable to the respondent as the finalization and approval of the layout plans has been held up for various reasons which have been and are beyond the control of the respondent including passing of an HT line over the layout, road deviatjons, depiction of villages etc.

However, the complainant despite having knowledge of happening of such force majeure eventualities and despite agreeing to extension of time in case the delay has occurred as a result of such eventualities has filed this frivolous, tainted and misconceived complaint in order to harass the respondent with a wrongful intention to extract monies.

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

Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the complaint can be decided on the basis of these undisputed documents and submissions made by the parties.

All other averments made in the complaint were denied in toto.

Jurisdiction of the authority 8.

E.

Page 12 of 22 10.

HARERA ffiGURUGRAM 9.

11.

596 of2023 The objection of the respondent regarding rejection of complaint on ground ofjurisdiction stands rejected.

The authority observes that it has territorial as well as subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given below: - E.I Territoriallurisdiction As per notification no.

1/92/2O17-1TCp dated 74.12. ted 74.12.2U,7 issued by The Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana the iurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory AuthoriBl, 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 Gurugram District.

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

E.lI Subiect matter iurisdiction Section 11[4)[a) of the Ac!

2016 provides thar rhe promorer shall be responsible to the allottee as per agreement for sale.

Section 11(4)(a] is reproduced as hereunder: Section 11(4)(a) Section 77 i+) rh" pron,oter rhott- [a) be responsible for oll obligations, responsibilities ond Itnctions under the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulotions made thereunder or to the allottees as per the agreement for salej or to the associotion of allottees, as the case moy be, till the conveyance of oll the opartments, plots ot buildings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common oreas to the ossociotion ofallottees or the competent authority, as the case moy be; Page 13 of 22 HARERA ffiGURUGRAI,/ Complaint No.

596 of2023 Section 34-Functions oI the Authority: 344 of the Act provides to ensure complionce of the obligations cost upon the promoters, the allottees and the reol estate agents under this Act ond the rules ond regulations made thereunder.

12.

So, in view of the provisions of the Act quored above, the authority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non_compliance of obligafions by the promoter leaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adiudicating officer if pursued by the complainant at a later stage.

F.

Findings on the obiections raised by the respondent: F,l Objectionregardingmaintainabilityofcomplaint 13.

The counsel for the respondent has raised an obiection that the complaint is barred by limitation as the complainant has made the payment back in 2012. k in 2012.

The objections to the same were to be raised in a time bound manner.

Hence, the complaint is not maintainable on the above-mentioned ground.

14.

0n consideration ofthe documents available on record and submrssions made by the party, the authoriry observes that the project in question ts an ongoing proiect, and the respondent/promoter has failed to apply and obtaining the Cc/part CC till date.

As per proviso to section 3 of Act of 2016, ongoing projects on the date of this Act i e.,28.07.2077 for which completion certificate has not been issued, the promoter shall make an application to the authority for registration of the said project within a period of three months from the date of commencement of this Act and the relevant part of the Act is reproduced hereunder: - Page a4 of Zz ffi HARERA S- eunuettnl,l 15 16.

596 of 2023 Provided that projects thot are ongoing on the date of commencement of this Act and for which the completion certificate hos not been issued, the promoter shall make an applicotion to the Authority for registration of the said project tuithin a period ofthree months from the dote of commencement of this Act.

The legislation is very clear in this aspect that a project shall be regarded as an "ongoing project" until receipt of completion certificate.

Since no completion certificate has yet been obtained by the promoter_ builder with regards to the concerned proiect.

It is important to note that despite receipt of consideration of Rs.

49,0O,000/- against the booked plot back in 2012 except stamp duty and other charges payable to the government, the respondent_promoter has failed to execute an agreement for sale with respect to the same and has failed to get the plot registered in name of the complainant till date.

As the respondent has failed to handover the possession of the allotted plot to the complainant and thus, the cause of action is continuing till date and recurring in nature. in nature.

The authority relied upon the section 22 of the Limitation Act, 1963, Continuing breaches and torts and the relevanr portion are reproduced as under [or ready reference: - 22.

Continuing breoches and torts- In the case oI a continuing breoch of (ontrqct or in the case of a continuing tort a fresh period of limitotion begins to run at every moment of the time during which the breach or the tort, as the case may be, continues.

17.

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and legal posirion, the obiection with regard to the complaint barred by limitation is hereby rejected.

G Findings on the relief sought by the complainant: Page 15 of 22 ffiHARERA S- eunuennM Complaint No.

596 of2023 G.I Direct the respondent to provide necessary details of the plot including plot number, lane number, and other relevant information of 300 sq. yard plot which has been allotted vide allotment letter dated OL.O3.2Ol2 and handover the possession of the plot admeasuring 3OO Square yards at Ramprastha City situated at Sector_gz, 93 & 95, Gurugram, Haryana to the complailant after obtaining the occupation certifi cate/completion certilicate.

G.ll Direct the respondent to issue and execute a BBA for the unit question in favour ofcomplainanL G.lll Direct the respondent to register a conveyance deed in favour complainant.

G.lV Direct the respondent to pay the delayed possession penalty at the rate of l8o/o per annum on the entire amount paid by the complainant to the respondenL G.V Direct the respondent not to charge anythilg which complainant is not legally bound to pay.

18, All the above-mentioned reliefs are interrelated to each other.

Accordingly, the same are being taken up together for ad,udication.

19.

The complainant has booked a plot admeasuring 300 sq. yards in the project of respondent named "Ramprastha Ciry,, Iocated in Sector 92, 93 and Sector 95, Gurugram by making a payment of Rs.49,00,000/- vide receipt dated 29.02.2012.

9.02.2012.

It was also specifically clarified that a specifi c plot shall only be earmarked once the zoning plans are approved.

20.

In the present complaint, the complainant intends to continue with the project and is seeking delay possession charges as provided under the proviso to section 18[1) ofthe Act.

Sec.

18(1J proviso reads as under. ln of PaEe 76 of 22 HARERA *S"GURUGRAM 2L.

596 of 2023 "Section 78: - Retun of qmount and compensotion 18(1). lf the promoterfails to complete or is unoble to give possession ofan apartment, plot, or building, - Provided that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the project, he sholl be poid, by the promoter, interest for every month ofdelay, till the handing over ofthe possession, ot such rote os may be prescribed-" Due date of possession: As per the documents available on record, no BBA has been executed betlveen the parties and the due date of possession cannot be ascertained.

A considerate view has already been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases where due date of possession cannot be ascertained then a reasonable time period of 3 years has to be taken into consideration.

It was held in matter Fortune Infrastructure v, Trevor d'lima (2078) 5 SCC 442: (2018) S SCC (civ) 1 and then was reiterated in Pioneer Urban tand & Inlrastructure Ltd.

Govindan Raghavan (2019) SC 725 -l "lvloreover, o person connot be made to woit indeJinitely for the possession of the lats allotted to them and they ore entitled to seek the refund of the omount poid by them, along with cctmpensation.

Although we ore awore of the foct thot when therewos ho delivery period stipulated in the agreement, a reasonable time has to be taken into considerotion_ In the focts and circumstances of this case, a time period of 3 years would have been feasonable Ior completion of the contract i.e., the possession was required to be given by last quorter of 2014. r of 2014.

Further there is no dispute os to the fact that until now there is no redevelopment of the property.

Hence, in view of the above discussion, which draw us to an irresistible conclusion thot there is defciency of service on the port of the oppellants and accordingly the issue is answered." In the instant case, the promoter has allotted a plot in its proiect vide preliminary allotment letter dated 01.03.201,2.

In view of the above- 22.

Page 17 of 22 HARERA M GURUGRAI/ 23.

596 of 2023 mentioned reasoning, the date of allotment ought to be taken as the date for calculating the due date of possession.

Therefore, the due date of handing over of the possession of the plot comes out to be 01.03.2 015.

Admissibility of delay possession charges at prescribed rate of interest: The complainant is seeking delay possession charges at the prescribed rate.

Proviso to section 18 provides thar where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be paid, by rhe promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of possession, at such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rule 15 of the rules.

Rule 15 has been reproduced as under: Rule 75, Prescribed rate oI interest- lproviso to section 12, section 1g ond sub-section (4) and subsection (7) oI section 191 (1) For the purpose of proviso to section 12; section 78; and sub sections (4) ond (7) of section 19, the ,.interest at the rate prescribed" sholl be the State Bank of lndil highest morginal cost o[ lending rate +2ok.: Provided that in case the Stote Bonk of lndia marginal cost of lending rate (MCLRI is not in use, it shall be rpplaccJ by tu.h benchmark lending rates which the Stote Bank of tndio may fx from time to time for lehding to the generol public.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the provision of rule 15 of the rules, has determined the prescribed rate of interest. interest.

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

24.

Page 18 of ZZ HARERA ffiGURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

596 of2023 25.

Consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i.e., httos://sbi.co.in. the marginal cost of lending rate [in short, MCLRJ as on date i.e., 13.08.2024 is 9%.

Accordingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost of lendiIlgrate +z\o i.e.,1lo/0.

26.

The definition ofterm'interest,as defined under section 2(zal ofthe Act provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter, in case of default, shall be equal to the rate of interest which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case of default.

The relevant section is reproduced below: "(zo) "interest" meons the rates of interest payable by the promoter or the allottee, os the cose moy be.

Explonation -For the purpose ofthis clause- (i) the rate ofinterest chorgeoble from the ollottee by the promoter, )n case of default, shall be equal to the rote of interest which the promoter shall be Iioble to pay the allottee, in cose ofdefoult; (ii) the interest poyoble by the promoter to the allottee shall be from the date the promoter received the amount or ony port thereof till the dote the omount or part thereof and tnterest thereon ts refunded, and the interest payable by the dllottee to the promoter sholl be from the date the allottee defaults in poyment ta the promoter till the date it is poidi' 27.

Therefore, interest on the delay payments from the complainant shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 11% by the respondent /promoter which is the same as is being granted to the complainant in case of delayed possession charges.

28. arges.

28.

On consideration ofthe documents available on record and submissions made by both the parties regarding contravention of provisions of the Act, the authority is satisfied that the respondent is in contravention of the section 11[4J(a) of the Act by not handing over possession by the Page 19 of 22 HARERA ffiGURUGRAN/ Complaint No.

596 of2023 due date.

The possession of the subiect plot was to be delivered by 01.03.2015.

However, despite receipt of Rs.

49,00,000/- against rhe booked plot back in 2012 except stamp dufy and other charges payable to the government, the respondent-promoter has failed to enter lnto a written agreement for sale with respect to the same and has failed to handover possession of the subiect plot to the complainant till date of this order.

Accordingly, it is the failure of the respondent/promoter to fuifil its obligations and responsibilities to hand over the possession within the stipulated period.

The authority is of the considered view that there is delay on the par-t of the respondent to offer of possession of the allotted plot to the complainant.

Further no CC/part CC has been granted to the project.

Hence, this project is to be treated as on_going project and the provisions of the Act shall be applicable equally to the builder as well as allottees.

29.

Accordingly, the non-compliance of the mandate contained in section 11(4J(a) read with section 18(U of the Act on the paft of the respondent is established.

As such, the complainant is entitled to delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest @11% p.a. w.e.f.

01.03.2015 till actual handing over of possession or offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining completion certificate/part completion certificate from the competent authority or, whichever is earlier, as per section 18(1) ofthe Act of2016 read with rule 15 ofthe rules.

H.

Directions of the authority PaEe 20 of 22 HARERA ffi GURUGRAI\i Complaint No.

596 of 2023 30. f 2023 30.

Hence, the authorify hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function authority under section 34(0: ll.

The respondent/promoter is directed to allot a specific plor of 300 sq. yds in its project namely Ramprastha City, Sector 92,93 a\d Sector 95 Gurugram and execute buyer,s agreement wjthin a period of 30 days and handover possession of the plot in questlon within three months after obtaining completion/part completion certificate from the competent authority.

The respondent/promoter is directed to pay interest to the complainant against the paid-up amount at the prescribed rate of 170/0 p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of possession i.e., 01.03.2015 till actual handing over of possessron or offer of possession plus two months after obtaining completion certificate/part completion certificate from the competent authoriry, whichever is earlier, as per section 18(1) of rhe Act of 2016 read with rule 15 ofthe rules.

The arrears ofsuch interest accrued from 01.03.2015 ttll the date of order by the authority shall be paid by the respondent/promoter ro the complainant within a period of 90 days from date of this order and interest for every month of delay shall be paid by the promoter to the allottees before 10th of the subsequent month as per rule 16[2J ofthe rules.

The complainant is directed to pay outstanding dues, if any, after adjustment ofinterest for the delayed period. compliance of entrusted to the Il Page 2l of ZZ l.

HARERA P" GURUGRAII 31.

32.

596 of 2023 v.

The rate of interest chargeable from the allottees by the promoter, in case of default shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 11% by the respondent/promoter which is the same rate of interest which the promoter shall be liable to pay rhe allottee, in case of default i.e., the delayed possession charges as per section 2(za) of the Act. vi. e Act. vi.

The respondent/promoter is directed to execute Conveyance Deed within a period of three months after obtaining of completion certificate/ part completion certificate from the competent authority.

Complaint stands disposed of.

File be consigned ro registry. "4nr,, Arun Kumar Chairman ^ -HiySli R"al Estate Regulatory Authority, curugram Dated: 13.O8.2024 ,,ijr'*i#".,- Member Pagc22 of 22