MRS KAMAL SINGHAL vs MS EMAAR MGF LAND LIMITED

ffiffi HARER& GURUGRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA Kamal Singhal Address:5523, Ground DLF Phase IV, Gurugra M/s Emaar MGF Land Office at: - ECE House, New Delhi-110001.

CORAM: Shri.

Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCE: Sushil Yadav (Advoca Dhruv Rohtagi fAdvc The present complaint section 31 of the Real E short, the Act) read with DevelopmentJ Rules, 2 11(a)(a) of the Act wh shall be responsible for all igations, Complaint No.

1885 of '2024 L ESTA REGUIATORY AIITH O RITY, URUGRA plaint no.

1885 of2O24 09.07.2025 of order Complainant Respondent Member ORDER Complainant Respondent the complainant/allottee under and Development) Act,2016 fin 28 of the in short, Real Estate (Regulation and Rules) for violation of section it is inter lia prescribed that the promoter ibilities and functions under / Page 1 of 16 Gandhi Marg, ffiHARERA ffi, GURUG[?*, I co,,pr''n'rv zo-l the provision of the Act or the rules and regulations made thereunder or to the allottee as per the agreement for sale executed inter se.

A.

Unit and project related details Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 2.

The particulars of unit details, sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainant, date of proposed handing over the possession, delay period, if have been detailed any, have been detailed in th following tabular form : Sr.

No.

Particulars Details 1.

Name of the project Gurgaon Greens, Sector 1,02, Gurugram, Haryana 2.

Project area 13.531. acres 3.

Nature of the project Group housing colony 4.

DTCP license no.

75 of 201.2 dated 31,.07.20L2 Valid till 30.07.2020 Name oI licensee Kamdhenu Projects Pvt.

Ltd. and another C/o Emaar MGF Land Ltd.

5.

HREM registered/ registered not Registered vide no.

36(a) of 20t7 dated o5.L2.2017 for 95829.92 sq. mtrs.

HRERA registration valid up to 3L.L2.2018 HRERA extension of registra vide tion 01 of 2OL9 dated 02.08.2019.

Extension valid up to 3L.L2.2019 6.

Unit no.

GGN-14-0702, Floor-7rh, Building/Tower no.-14 (As on page no.

L8 of complaint) 7.

Unit measuring [super areaJ L650 sq.

J L650 sq.ft { Page 2 of 15 ffi& saii qqii HARER& GURUGI?AM Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 (As on page no.

L8 of complaint) B.

Provisional allotment lettt favor of original allottee rin 25.01..2013 (As on page no.

28 of reply) 9.

Date of execution of b agreernent ,rlrar', IBetween the original allottee and res;pondent] 04.04.201.3 [As on page no.

15 of complaint) 10.

Endorsement letter in favor of the complainant 26.06.2020 (As on page no.

66 of complaint) 11.

Posses:sion clause 14, POSSESSION (a) Time of handing over the Possqssion Subjept to terms of this clause and barrilpg force majeure conditions, subje\t to the Allottee having complied with all the terms and condilions of this Agreement, and nat L)eing in defautt under any of the provisions of this Agreement and lompliance with all provisions, formQlities, documentation etc., os presclibed by the Company, the Company proposes to hand over the posse$sfon of the Ilnit within fi ffhitfu Sixl months from the date of start of cq qlf,ugtion, subject to timely compliance of the provislons of the Agreement by the Allottee.

The Allottee agrees and understands that the Company shall be entitled to q grace period of 5 .$Ue) months. for aonlvino and obtainina the comoletion c e rtifi c ate' o ccuo ati o n c e rtifi c ate / Page 3 of 16 in respect of the Unit and/or the ffiHARERA ffi- GURIJGRAM l.

Complaint No.

1885 of 202 Proiect.

I tilr*ris supplied) | (As on page no.31of complaint) | 1,2.

Date of start of r:onstructi, per statement of'account r 29.04.2024 atpage 95 of re ,n as lated rly L4.06.20L3 13.

Due date of posselssion 74.tt.2076 L4.

Total sale consideration Rs.89,34,983 /- flncluding BSP-Rs.74,36,583f-, PLC -Rs.4,95,000/-, Car parking- Rs.3,00,000 /-) (As on page no.

L9 of complaint) 15 Total amount paid Rs.95,25,560 /- (As per S.O.A dated 29.04.2024 on page no.

95 of reply) 1,6.

Occupation certificate 1,6.07.2019 77.

Offer of possessrion 12.12.2018 (As on page no.67 of complaint) 18.

Unit handover letter 28.09. ter 28.09.2020 (As on page no.

70 of complaint) t9.

Conveyance deedl t7.t2.2021. (As on page no.

75 of complaint) B.

1.

Facts of the complaint The complainant h.as made t I.

That the respr)ndent ga their forthcoming proje 102, Gurgaon promising Le following submissions: - e advertisement in various newspapers al :t named "Gurgaon Greens", situated at Se various advantages, like world class amen Page 4 I cr-d;, -" lBBs;itor; I bout lctor Lities .y of 16 ffiHARERA S-GURUGRAM Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 I and timely completion/execution of the project etc.

Relying on the promise and undertakings given by the respondent, the original allottee booked an apartment/flat measuring 1650 sq.ft. in aforesaid project for a total sale consideration of Rs.89,34,983/- and the same was latcr endorsed in favour of l{ar.

Bhushan Kumar Singhal (Husband of the complainant) on 1,7.09.2013, the said unit was again endorsed in the favour of the complainant and her husband (name of complainant was addedJ on 16.06.2020 thereafter the name of Mr Bhushan Kumar Singhal was striked off and on 79.06.2020, the unit remained only in the name of complainant.

II.

That the cornplainant made payment of Rs.97,00,s62/- ro the respondent. llhe Builder Buyer's Agreement was executed on 04.04.2013 and as per the Agreement, the respondents had allottecl a unit/Flat bearing no.

GGN-1,4-0702,7tr, Floor, Tower 14 having super area of 1650 sq. ft. to dhe complainant.

As per para no.14[a) of the Agreement, thr: respond0nt had agreed to deliver the possession of the unit within 36 months from the date of start of construction. i,e 14.06.201,3.

III.

That as per ther BBA, the pespondent had to hand over the possession of' the unit by 13.06.201,6 to the complainant.

It is pertinent to mention here that respondent harnded over the physical possession on the said unit on 28.0t1.2020, after a delay of almost more than 4 years. conveyance clered was executed for the said unit on 1,7.1.2.2021.

IV. .2021.

IV.

That the complainant uspd to telephonically ask the respondent about the progress ,of the preject and the respondent always gave false impression that the work is going on in full mode and accordingly asked for the payment$ which the complainant gave on time. on visiting the site, the complainant was shocked and surprised to see that / Page5of16 ffiHARERA ffi" eunuenntil VIII. construction work is not address the queries of th V.

That the respondent h intention of the respond completing the work an respondent's mala-fide and defrau Despite receiving more demands raised has failed to deliver the VI.

That the construction of booked was not comp reasons best knoWn ulterior motive of the innocent people fraudul VII.

That on the ground o subjected to pery the san to pay interest on the: promise datr: of pos complainant.

That the complainant pay delay possession possession of the unit Thus, the respondent complainnnt with his and wrongfully gains complainant.

C.

Relief sought by the compl Page 6 of 16 Complaint No.

1BB5 of 2024 ing on and no one was present at the site to complainant. ed played fraud upon the complainant.

The only nts was to take payments for' the flat without not handing over the possession on time.

The nd dishonest motives and intention cheated the complainant. than L00o/o payments on time for all the the respondent, the respondent essisn,bf unit within the stipulated period. e block in which the complainant's unit was within promised time as per BBA for the the respondent; which clearly shows that pondent was to extract money from the tly. parity and equify, the respondent also be rate of interest hence the respondent is liable amount paid by the complainant from the ion till the unit is actually delivered to the s requested the respondent several times to actual handing over the harges till the t the respondent has flatly refused to do so. to do so. in a pre-planned manner defrauded the hard earned huge amount of money imself and caused wrongful loss to the 4.

D.

6.

III. ffiHARERA ffiGlJRLTGRntrl The complainant has sought f, i.

Direct the respondent to p paid by the complainant, On the date of hearing, the au about the contraventions as section 11(4) (a) of the Act Reply by the respondent.

The respondent has contested I.

That the posses:;ion was the complainant took th executed a conveyance d been enjoying the, unit wi of the complainernt is ap entire transaction on the completion of al)t obligatio for such a long period and That the complainant ch Possession Charges and by the responde,nt ir from the lack of any docu have raised any:such addi The present complaint is Conveyance Deed has al absolved of all or any liabi terms of Section 1,1( ) of 4ct,201,6.

1885 of 2024 lowing relief(s): delayed possession charges on the amount rity explained to the respondent/promoter lleged to have been committed in relation to plead guilty or not to plead guilty. the complaint on the following grounds: - ffered to the complainant on 1,2.12.2018 and possession on 28.09.2020 and thereafter, ,dated 17.12.?02'1, and the complainant has out any demur/protest.

The lack of bonafide t from the fact that after conclusion of the execution of the Conveyance Deed and the of the respondent, he chose to remain silent as approached the Authority to extort money. to never raise any claim towards Delay agreeable to the compensation so awarded s of the Buyer's Agreement.

Hence, it is clear entary proof, whereby the complainant may onal claim. maintainable in view of the fact that the ady been executed and the respondent is ity towards Delay Possession Charges, even in he Real Estate (Regulation and Development) r' Page 7 of 16 V.

HARTRA GUI?UGRAM ry. ?UGRAM ry.

That upon the hando r of possession and execution of the Conveyance Deed, the mplainant has accorded his satisfaction to the developer and voluntarily discharged abilities under the Buyer's Agreement. 'l'he the services provided b the developer of all its I Unit Handover Letter da 28.09.2020, executed by the complainant clearly records "Upon nce of possession, the liabilities and obligations of the as enumerated in the sllotment letter/ r of the Allottee stand satisfied".

Thus, the Agreement executed in respondent is discharged Possession Charges, wh of all liabilities, including the claim of Delay are being claimed by way of present complaint.

I t is barred by limitation.

The complainant has ssion on L2.12.201,8, on which the cause of lay compensation has arisen.

The present 23.04.2024, after a gross delay of more than 5 years.

The complainan cannot be allowed to sleep over its rights indefinitely arrd wake u at any time as he pleases.

The respondent for indefinite period of time. cannot be held at gunpoin VI.

That the Original Alldttee That the prese,nt compla received the orfl'er of po action for claiming the complaint has been filpd in Sector - 101Z, Village making the tlooking, th independent eh,QUiries wi was fully satisfied about a and informed decision, un book the unit in question.

1BB5 of 2024 approached the respondent and expressed apartment in the residential group housing spondent known as "Gurgaon Greens" situated hankot, Tehsil & District Gurgaon.

Prior to original allottee conducted extensive and regard to the project and it was only after he aspects of the project, he took an independent nfluenced in any manner by the respondent, to an interest in booking colony developed by the Page I of 16 ./ ffiHARERA #-GuRuoRntl VIII. ut.

That thereafter the origi bearing no GGN-14-0702, project vide provisional a allottee consciously and w for remittance of the further represented to installment on time as per reason to suspec:t the bon :t the bon allot the unit in question in That thereafter, Buyer's between the original a That the complainant,ig the apartment in qn.sdion ]: rental income/pr,o.f,it irom of the complainant. booked by the complainan purpose of self-use as their IX. x.

That the Origirral Allottee: maliciously chose to igno flouted in making timely essential, crucial and an ,i Agreement.

Furthermore, complainant, default in the failure has a cascading e execution of the project enormous business losses That the rights and obl[ xt. respondent are complete Page 9 of 16 ,/ Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 allottee was allotted an independent unit Tower-l4 admeasuring 1550 sq. ft., in the otment letter dated 25.01.2013.

The original lfully opted for an "lnstalment payment plan" consideration for the unit in question ancl e respondent that he shall remit every e payment schedule.

The respondent had no fide of the Original Allottee and proceeded ro t dated 04.04.20L3 was executed and the respondent. "Allottee" but is an Investor who has booked as a speculative investment in order to earn resale.

The apartment in question has been as a speculative investment and not for the residence.

Therefore, no equity lies in favour well as the complainant consciously and the letters issued by the respondent ancl ments of the instalments which was an ispensable requirement under the Buyer's en the proposed allottees, such as the payments as per schedule agreed upon, the on the operations and the cost for proper ncreases exponentially and further causcs the respondent. tions of the complainant as well as the and entirely determined by the covenants favor. ffiHABEB& #*eunUGRAM incorporated in the Buyef's Agreement which continues to be binding upon the parties thereto with full force and effect.

Clause 14 of the Buyer's Agreement provides that subject to the allottees having complied with all the terms and conditions of the Buyer's Agreement, and not being in default of the same, possession of the unit would be would be handed over within 36 months plus grzlrce period of 5 months, from the date of start of construction.

XII.

That Clause 16 of the Buyer's Agreement provides that compensation for any delay in delivery of possession shall only be given to such Allottees who are not in default of their obligations envisaged under the Buyer's Agreement and who have not defaulted in payment of instalments as per the payment plan incorpolated in the Buyer's Agreement.

In case of delay caused due to non-receipt of occupation certificate, completion certificate or any other permission/sanction from the competent authorities, no compensation sl:all be pafable to the allottees.

The complainant, having defaulted in palrment of i[rstalments, are also thus, not entitled to any compensation or any a{nount towards interest under the Buyer's Agreement.

It is submitt[d that the complainant by way of instanr complaint is demandingl interest for alleged delay in delivery of possession.

The interest is compensatory in nature and cannot be granted in derc,gation and ignorance of the provisions of the Buyer's Agreement.

XIII.

That vide a request in Seprtember 2013, the original allottee, transferrecl the unit in favour of the husband of the complainant.

In furtherance of the same, they exe,cuted transfer documents such as Agreement to Sell, indemnity cun:t undertaking, joint request letter, affidavit etc, to effect this transfer.

Acr:ordingly, the respondent issued Nomination letter dated Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 Page 10 of 16 ffiHARERA S-- eunitennvi 20.09.2013 in respect of the unit in question in favour of the husband of the complainant.

XIV.

That subsequently, upon a request of the complainant and her husband, the name of the complainant was added along with her husband in respect of the unit in question and thereafter, on their request, the name of the husband of the complainant was deleted.

XV.

That the respondent had applied for Occupation Certificate on 13.04.201,8. .04.201,8.

Occupation Certificate was thereafter issued by the concerned statutory authority in favour of the respondent on 05.1,2.2018.

XVI.

That, without admitting or acknowledging the truth or legality of the allegations advetnced by t[re complainant and without prejudice to the contentions of the respdndent, it is respectfully submitted that the provisions of the Act are not retrospective in nature.

The provisions of the Act cannot undo or modiff the terms of an agreement duly executecl prior to coming into effec( of the Act. lt is further submitted that merely because the Act applies to pngoing projects which are registered with the authority, the trrct cannot be said to be operating retrospectively, The complainant cannot demand any interest or compensation beyond the terms and conriitions incorfporated in the Buyer's Agreement.

XVII.

That the construction of ,tn. project/allotted unit in question already stands completerd and the respondent has already offered possession of the unit in question to the complainants.

XVIII.

That the contprlainant was offered possession of the unit in question through letter of ofTer of possession dated 12.1,2.2018 and subsequently, :several reminders were sent to the complainant to take the possession.

That an indemnity cum undertaking for possession dated 08.07.2020 was also executed by the complainant.

Thc complainant was called upon to remit balance payments including Page1l ofl6 / Complaint No.

1885 of 20?4 HARERA W*GUI?UGRAM delayed payrnent charges and to complete the necessary formalities/documentation necessary for handover of the unit in question to the complainant.

However, the complainant approached the respondent with request for payment of compensation for the allegecl delay in utter disregard of the terms and conditions of the I3uyer's Agreement.

Agreement.

The respondent explained to the complainant that he is not entitled to any' compensation in terms of the Buyer's Agreement on account of default in timely remittance of instalments as per schedule of payment incorporated in the Buyer's Agreement.

The respondent earnestly requersted the complainant to obtain possession of the unit in question and further requested the complainant to execute a conveyance deed in respect of the unit in question after completing all the formalities regarding delivery of possession.

However, the complainant did not pay any heed to the legitimate, just and fair requests of thre respondent and threatened the respondent with institution of unwarranted litigation.

XIX.

That the complainant apprpached the respondent requesting it to deliver the possession of the uniit in question.

A unit handover letter daterl 28.09.2020 was executed Py ttre complainant, specifically and expressly agreeing that the liabilit[es and obligations of the respondenr as enumerated in the allotnient letter or the Buyer's Agreement stancl satisfied.

The complainant has intentionally distorted the real and true facts in order t<l generate an impression that the respondent has reneged from its commitrnents.

No cause of action has arisen or subsists in favour of the complainant to institute or prosecute the instant complaint.

XX.

That after execution of the unit handover letter dated ZB.O1.ZOZ0 and obtaining of pos:session of the unit in question, the complainant is left with no right, entitlement {r claim against the respondent.

It needs to be Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 Page 12 of 16 t HARERE W,GUI?UGI?AM highlighted that the complainant has further executed a conveyance deed dated 17.12.2021, in respect of the unit in question.

The transaction between the complainant and the respondent stands concluded and no right or liability can be asserted by the respondent or the complainant against the other. the other.

That in addition thereto, the complainant has admitted their obligation to discharge their HVAT liability there under.

It is pertinent to take into reckoning that the complainant has obtained possession of the unit in question and has executed conveyance deed in respect thereof, after receipt of the waiver of delay payment charges payable by the complainant amounting to Rs.3,59 ,84g.

XXI.

That the comlllainant has preferred the instant complaint in completc contravention of their eallier representations and documents executed by them.

The cornplainairt has filed the instant false and frivolous 7. respondent in emands. placed on the mplaint can be bmission made complaint in order to mount undue pressure upon the order to make it succumb to their unjust and illegitimate d Copies of all the relevant documents have been filed and record.

Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the co decided on the bas;is of these undisputed documents and su by the parties. |urisdiction of thr: authority The Authority ob:;erves that it has territorial as well as jurisdiction to adiudicate the present complaint for the below: E.

B. subject matter reasons given E.

I Territorial jurisdiction 9.

As per notification no. l/92/201,7-1TCP dated L4.12.2017 issued by 1'own and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugtram shall be entire Gurugram District for all Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 Page 13 of 76 t ffiHARERA #-GURUGRAM 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 the present complaint.

E.

II Subject matter jurisdiction 10' Section 11(a)(a) of the Act, 20L6 provides that the promoter shall be responsible to the allottee as per agreement for sale. for sale.

Section 1,I(4)[a) is reproduced as hereunder: Section 11({(a) Be responsible for all obligations, responsibitities and functions under the provisions of this Act or tke rules and regulations mode thereunder or to the allottees ds per the Sgreement for sale, or to the association of allottees, as t:he case mo! be, till the conveyance of all the apartments, plots or builclings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common areas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be; 11,.

So, in view of the provisions of the Act quoted above, the Authority has complete jurisdict;lon to decirde the comprlaint regarding non-compliance of obligations by the promoter.

F.

Findings on the objections raised by the respondent.

F.I. whether the complaint is barred by limitation or not?

1,2. ln the present com.plaint, thd Builder Buyer's Agreement was executed on 04.04.2013 between the original allottee and the respondent and the same was later endorsed in favoun of Mr.

Bhushan Kumar Singhal fHusband of the complainant) on 1,7.09.201,3.

The said unit was again endorsed in favour of the complainant and her husband (name of complainant was addedJ on 16.06.2020 thereafter the name of Mr.

Bhushan Kumar Singhal was striked off anrd on 19.06.2020, the unit remained only in the name of complainant.

1885 of 2024 Page 14 of 16 * ffiHARERA #"GURUGRAM Complaint No.

1885 of 2024 13' As per clause 14 of the agreement, the respondent was to offer the possession of the unit to the allottee vr,ithin 36 months from the clate of start of construction.

The date of start ol construction as per the Statement of Accounts dated 29.04.2024 is L4.06.2C113.

The respondent is also enritled to a grace period of 5 months, being unclualified.

Thus, the due date contcs out to be 1.4.'11,.20L5.

L3. .20L5.

L3.

On consideration of the documents available on record and submissions made by both the parties regarding contravention of provisions of the Act, the Authority has observed that the Buyer's Agreement between the original allottee (Husband of the,complainant) and the respondent was I executed on 04.04.201,3. fhe uriit v/as endorsed in favour of the complainant on 26.06.2,020t i.e., after the due date.

As and when the complainant entered into the project, the due date had already passed and the complainant was very rrruch aware of the delay on the project. 'l'he respondent had obtained theloccupation certificate in respect of the project, before the endorsement of thie unit in the name of the complainant.

14' The respondent hasr raised aniobjection that the present complaint is barrecl by limitation.

The complainrant has received the offer of possession on 1.2.1,2.201'8, on lvhich thq cause of action for claiming the delay I compensation has; arisen.

The present complaint has been filed on 23.04.2024, after a gross delay of mor,s than 5 years, The complainant cannot be allowed to sleep over its rights indefinitely and wake up at any time as he pleases.

The respofrdent cannot be held at gunpoint for indefinite period of time.

15.

The Authority is cognizant ofl the view ttrat the law of limitation does not strictly apply to the Real Estflte Regulation and Development Authority Acr of 201.6.

However, the Authorlity under ser:tion 38 of the Act of 2016, is to be guided by the principle of na[ural justice.

It is universally accepted maxim Page 15 of 16 ,r' ffiL|ABERA ffi.- eunt'tettAM and the law assists th rights.

Therefore, to reasonable period of ti right.

This Authoriry of for a litigant to initi circumstances.

L6.

In the present matter the of possession of the unit filed the present compla the date of cause of act complaint has not been by the limitation. l-7.

Consequently, the co 18.

File be consigned to Dated: 09.07.2025 AV el le Complaint No. plaint No.

1885 of Z024 are vigilant, not those who sleep over their opportunistic and frivolous litigation a s to be arrived at for a litigant to agitate his ew that three years is a reasonable time period tigation to press his rights under normal of action arose on 1.Z.l2.ZOlg when the offer made by the respondent.

The complainant has n 30.Q4.202t4 which is 5 years 4 months from he Authority is of the view that the present nrithin a reasonable time period and is barrecl l dismissed being barred by limitation.

Regulatory Authority, Gurugram Sa Page 16 of 16 Mem