MRS SHRADDHA AND KULDEEP YADAV vs SAI AAINA FARMS PRIVATE LIMITED

HARER& ffiGUI?UGRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM 1.

The present complaint has b".n iilea by the complainants/allottees under Section 3l- of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (in short, the Act) read with Rule 28 ofthe Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2Ot7 fin short, the Rules) for violation of Section 11ta)(a) of the Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provisions of the Act or the Rules and regulations made thereunder or to the allottees as per the agreement fbr sale executed inter se.

Page 1 oflT "/ ComPlaint no. i,l.l:::ltTf,?#''"?'"' Order pronounced on Mrs.

Shraddha and Mr.

Kuldeep Yadav Resident of: House no.

C11,60, Chandrapuri, Mathura, Uttar Pradesh Versus M/s Sai Aaina Farms Private Limited Regd. office: 3OZA, Global Foyer, Golf Course Road, Sector 43, Gurugram- APPEARANCE: Sh.

Prashant Vashist [Adrrocate) None Complaint No.

1678 of 20?4 L678 of2024 0t.05.2024 14.08.2024 23.07.2025 Complainants Respondent Member Complainants Respondent 1,22009 CORAM: Shri Ashok Sangwan $* I* 1fin HARERA ffiCUI?UOI?AM Unit and proiect related details: The particulars of unit details, sale consideration, the amount paid complainants, date of proposed handing over the possession, delay if any, have been detailed in the following tabular form: Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 by the period, A.

2.

Sr.

No.

Particulars Details 1.

Name and location of the proiect "Mahira Homes" at Sector 68, Gurugram, Haryana 2.

Nature of the proiect Affordable group housing cobrry 3.

Proiect area 9.96875 acres 4.-: 5.

DTCP license no.

106 0f 20L7 dated 22.L2.2017 Name of licensee Mohan investment and properties Pvt.

Ltd. and others.

6.

Date of cancellation of license no.

106 of 20L7 09.05.2022 [Taken from another case of the same project i.e., CR/3322/2023 decided on 11.03.2025) 7.

3.2025) 7.

RERA Registered/ not registered Registration revoked by the Authority vide order dated LL.03.2024 B.

Allotment letter dated 03.05.2018 fpase 26 of comPlaint) 9.

Unit no.

F-804, tower l, Eighth floor fpase 32 of comPlaint) 10.

Unit area admeasuring 543.72 sq. ft. (carPet area) 100 sq. ft. (balconY area) fpase 32 of comPlaint) 11.

Date of building Plan approval 23.02.20L8 (As per information provided by Planning Branch of the AuthoriW) 12.

Environmental clearance dated 05.06.2018 (As per information provided by Planning Branch of the AuthoritY) 13.

Execution of BBA 05.06.2018 fpaee 28 of comPlaint) 1.4.

Possession clause as Per BBA B.

Possession "8.1 Subiect to force maieure :ircumstances, intervention of statutory authorities, receiPt of occupation certificate and Allottee [raving timely complied with all its Page2 of 17 ,/ ffi ffis HARERA GUI?UGRAM Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 rbligations, formalities or locumentation, as prescribed by )romoter/Developer and not being n default under any part hereof and [partment Buyer's Agreement ncluding but not limited to the imely payment of instalments of the Ither charges as per the payment llan, Stomp Duty and registration :harges, the Promoter/Developer ,roposes to offer possession of the iaid Apartment to the Allottee vithin a period of 4 year from the late of approval of building plans or ;rant of environment clearance, hereinafter referred to as the ' Commencement Dote"), whichever s later." (Emphasis supplied) (page 38-39 of complaint) 15.

Possession clause as per Affordable Housing Policy, 201,3 1(IV) of the Affordable Housing Policy, 20L3 All such projects shall be required to be necessarily completed within 4 years from the approval of building plans or grant of environmental cleerence, whichever is later.

This date shall be referred to as the "date of commencement of project" for the purpose of this policy. is policy.

The licenses shall not be renewed beyond the said 4 years period from the date of commencement of proiect.

16.

Due date of possession 05.L2.2022 [calculated from the date of environmental clearance being later)(an extension of 6 months provided in view of HARERA notification no.

9 /3-20201 17.

Basic sale consideration Rs.22,24,887 /- (As per payment plan at page 53 of complaint) 18.

Amount paid by the Rs.24,03,523 /- Page 3 of 17 ./ HARERE ffiGURUGI?AM complainant (as per S0A dated 02.09.202t at page 65 of complaint) 19.

Occupation certificate Not obtained 20.

Offer of possession Not offered B.

Facts of the complaint: 3.

The complainant has made the following submissions: - a) That the representatives of respondent company approached the complainants and showed a promising image of a project "Mahira Homes" by M/S Sai Aaina Farms Pvt.

Ltd and assured that respondent that they are having all the requisite sanctions from the appropriate authority for the construction and development of the said project.

It was further assured to the complainants that and the construction of the projects is being carried in full swing and same will be completed on within 4 [four) years from the date of approval of building plan or grant of environment clearance, whichever is later. b) That buyer's agreement for the unit executed between the complainants and the respondent also stipulated the said condition, as the relevant clause pertaining to the possession states that the possession of the unit will be handed over to the allottee within 4 years of getting the approval of building plans or grant of environment clearance, whichever is later' It is pertinent to mention herein that the approval of building plans was granted to the respondent by the office of DGTCP on 23.02.2018 vide memo No.

ZP-1,202/AD[RA)/201,8/6797, as per which the date of handing over the possession of unit in question was 23.02.2022.

3.02.2022. c) That being lured by the false commitments of the respondent, the complainants paid an advance amount of Rs.1,12,0001- to the respondent to get the booking confirmed for the unit bearing no.

804, ZBHK Unit Type-A in tower-F having carpet area of 543.72 sq. ft. along Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 Page 4 of 17 WHARERA ffiGTJRUGRAM with 100 sq. ft. balcony area in the project of the respondent for the total sale consideration of Rs.24,03,523/-.

A receipt against the said amount for booking dated 19.02.20L8 and booking application form was filled and issued by the respondent for confirmation of booking of the complainant in the project "Mahira Homes".

That an acknowledgement receipt of amount Rs.1,12,000/- was issued by the respondent to the complainant towards the payment made by the complainant against the ,.P.e,,{ raised by the respondent.

After the period of more than S monj:$"$lqhp,rrCspondent issued an allotment letter to the complainants. 'ffi . .t ,{ It is germane to mention that:the agreement contained one sided terms and conditions favouring respon$int only- Since the complainants by the time of exe On of agreement had already paid a total amount of u Rs.l-,12,0 OO /- huA ftrerefOrO,'theyrwe'ie tia$ped into the lies laid by the |N, l:"'t i:' 'r' "i :::l respondent, lett]LWitfr dro Opti6n t,.i'.qiidainants had to sign on the dotted line of tlie agreement.

Thb agr.ei nt had a detailed clause in case of failure to deliver pois,,i$n.pfthe developer under clause B.

That as per cllyse B of thd$eement, the respondent had agreed to deliver the poi'beilionii of the ftat/untt within 4 years of sanction of building plans or getting the,lnvironment clearance, whichever is later, : and the respcihaint'had got the shnctibn of the building plans on 23.O2.1OLB and thus the respondent had to deliver the possession of the shop by 23.02.2022.

Complaint No. plaint No.

1678 of 2024 d) eJ 0 That it would also be relevant to mention here that the complainants availed a home loan for the purpose of payment of the consideration of the said unit from ICICI Bank which was sanctioned by the bank on 08.08.2018 and was disbursed on 20.08.2018.

Page 5 oflT / ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRAM That the complainants have already paid the total sale consideration of Rs.24,03,5231- since the booking till date to the respondent.

That complainants had not defaulted in any payment and it was made as and when the demand was raised by the respondent' That the complainants visited the proiect site of the respondent and was shocked to look at the state of affairs.

No work was being carried out by the respondent.

Only the partial structure was erected by the respondent.

That the compllipants used to telephonically ask the rut the p.oglgff**. project and the respondent always gave false impression tha]tihell wort is going in full mode and accordingly asked.,6or thephy#ents Wtl-icfr the complainants gave on time and the cunplainants, whe,n"visiteid'to the site were shocked and surprised to r#at constiuttion Work i's hot going on and no one was i present at the itru fo addre$s the dueries Of,the complainants.

It appears that respondent'trip ptayed fraud upon the complainants.

The only intention of the rgspondeni *as 1o take-i?Vments for the unit without completing the *oit a t.Hnp..q pver the possession on time.

It is pertinent to mention ,here. thht by this time the due date of offer of 14 _- l. possession along with extended periodigrace period has already been expired and the respondent had not completed the construction work' i) That the comflmhntS tried to'approach'the respondent to get the construction of the shop completed as soon as possible to avoid any further loss of finances but it was of no use. of no use.

The illegal, unethical and fraudulent actions of the respondent had led to great physical exhaustion, mental torture and financial losses to the complainants. j) That despite receiving the total sale consideration of the unit on time, and after numerous requests and reminders over phone calls and Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 s) h) Page 6 oflT ,/ HARERA ffiCURUGRAM personal visits by the complainants, the respondent has not delivered the possession of the allotted unit to the complainants within stipulated period.

That it is very much apparent that the construction of the unit has not been completed within the stipulated time and the respondent has not fulfilled its contractual obligation and further, have not handed over the possession of the unit to the complainants till this date for the reasons best known to the respondent.which clearly depicts the ulterior motive of respondent to fraudul"ntly. money from the innocent people' :lause B(7J ;i ++i$'agreement it was agreed by the respondent that i* oilil5a ,aeli1r, the respondent shall pay the comprainants affirest, a.t,rhe rate nles;ribed in the rules for every month of deld#gt tt'.

1-rl1:$sess'!-?r,*ft is however, pertinent to mention here -ft.* fil" r.9sngr$Fnthas expioiied the complainants by not providing the bos.Lruion of tdl u$it 6uari andr a delay from the agreed possession plan"ala neither have gi.ven the compensation as per the terms of the agreement. mJ That the possession of the unit has not been handed over to the complainants till date.

Further, it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent has delayed the construction of the said proiect and caused un-due hardships to the complainants.

At present the respondent is least worried about completing the construction work and handing over the possession to the unit buyers.

As such, the construction work that is being carried out at the construction site is bare minimal and at a very slow rate. slow rate.

There is no chance of completion of construction in near future.

Complaint No, 1678 of 2024 k) l) PageT oflT,/ HARER& ffiGUI?UGI?AM n) The respondent has failed to obtain Occupation Certificate from the concerned department till date.

It is pertinent to mention herein that the RERA registration 2 1. of 201,8 of the said project has also expired and respondent is in no position to complete the project in question. o) That having left with no other option the complainant wants to withdraw from the project as the respondent has not acted in accordance with the term of the buyer's agreement and has not handed over the possession of the unit within the stipulated duration hence as per obligations duly engraved in section 12,11 (4),19(4), the promoters are liable to refund the paid amount along with interest at the prescribed rate i.e. !2o/o per annum' p) That the cause of action for filing of the present complaint arose when the respondent got signed an illegal and arbitrary agreement from the complainants.

The cause of action subsequently arose on multiple requests to the resPondent to occasions when the complainants made complete the construction on time.

The cause of action arose when the respondent failed to deliver possession of the unit.

The cause of action is continuous one and still subsisting, hence the present complaint' C.

Relief sought by the complainants: 4.

The complainants have sought following relief[s): I.

Direct the respondent to refund the entire amount paid by the complainants along with prescribed interest from the date of respective deposit till its actual realization' II.

Direct the respondent to pay interest at the rate of |4o/o on the Rs.24,03,523 /- paid as booking/upfront amount' III.

Direct the respondent to pay a compensation of Rs' 1 lakh towards legal expenses incurred by the complainants' Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 Page B of\7 r' ffi ffi HARTRP, Complaint No, 1678 of 2024 OUI?UGI?AM IV.

UGI?AM IV.

Direct the respondent to pay an amount of Rs.

2 lacs to the complainants towards mental and physical harassment.

5.

The present complaint was filed on 01.05 .2024 and registered as complaint no. t67812024.

Notice sent to the respondent through e-mail [crm(DmahiragrqUp.com) was duly served on 02.05.2024.

Notice sent to the respondent through post [EH07609B3B4IN) was also duly served.

As per the registry, the complainants sent a copy of the complaint along with annexures via speed post as well as email.

The tracking report for the same was submitted by the comelglfa$f along with the complaint.

The respondent failed to file,,,,B rit[iil rdPly a1d is intentionally delaying the proceedings of the Atrthorlty Uy,. faiU4g to appear and file a written reply.

Therefore, the defefld rOfltt u reipondent is struck off for non-filing of the 6. reply vide order dated 23.07.2025, and the matter is being decided based on the facts and documents submitted with the complaint, which remain undisputed.

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 submission made by the complainants. furisdiction of the authority The authority observes that it has territorial as well as subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given D.

7. below.

D.l Territorial iurisdiction B.

As per notification no.

1,/92/20L7-1TCP dated 1,4.1,2.2017 issued by Town and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gurugram District for all Page9 ofLT / $ffiHARERA ffi-.GURUGRAT\,I Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 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.

D.

Plaint.

D.II Subiect matter iurisdiction g.

Section 11(al(a) of the Act, 201,6 provides that the promoter shall be responsible to the allottees as per agreement for sale.

Section 1,1,(4)[a) is reproduced as hereunder: Section 77 @) The 'regulations made th{"tiuhd,pirQLt'io"the allottees as per the agreement for sql'E,.,ay to,thi_aS"qg.ciation of allottees, as the case may be, till th4'ionw)ange af u!! the ,apartments, plots or buildings,asthq'cafiemaybe,tothsallottegst:prthecommonareas to the assocla*o4 of allo,tteei'or"t;tl,:tcomiryient authority, as the case may beg i i ,J Section 3a-yqnctio4f of itie *7thd;ritliy'''. ' "' .' 3a(f) of the Act,pTqiidis to ensure ,compliahCi' of the obligations cast upon ih, prori:fyis, ihe allottees,!nd,fr:' ,! esta.te agents under th i s A ct a n d thio''tulus. and re g ulati o n s m a de thi r e u n d e r' 10.

So, in view of the provisions of'the Act quoted above, the Authority has complete j urisdiction,-io dgcide the ;omR11nt regarding non-compliance of ly thd promoter leaving aside compensation which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by the complainant at a later l, ", r ,r': stage. ',.".- " '.': ' 11.

Further; the Authority has no hitch in proceeding with the complaint and to grant a relief of refund in the present matter in view of the judgement passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court ln"Newtech Promoters and Developers private Limited Vs State of U.P, and Ors," (Supra) and reiterated in case of "M/s Sana Realtors Private Limited & other Vs llnion of India & others" SLp (Civil) No.

73005 of 2020 decided on 72,05.2022 wherein it has been laid down as under: Page 10 ofLT r ffi ffi wiE wi HARTRS, Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 GUr?UGRAM "g6.

From the scheme of the Act of which a detailed reference has been made and taking note of power of adiudication delineated with the regulatory authority and adjudicating officer, what finally culls out is thot although the Act indicates the distinct expressions like -'refund', 'i efund', 'interest', 'fenalty' and 'compensation', a conioint reading _of S.ections 7g and 19 ctearly manifests that when it comes to refund of the emount, and interest on the refund omount, or directing payment of interest for delayed delivery of possession, or penalty and interest thereon, it is the regulatory authority which has the power to examine and determine the outcome of a complaint.

At the same time, when it comes to a question of seeking the relief of adiudging compensation and interest thereon under Sections 72, 74, 78 and 79, the adiudicating officer excJ-U;;|vel! has the power to determine, keeping in view the colle1tly."g.,:|9gdi,tlp of Section 71' read with Section 72 of in, nrt. if the aaiugiig,ttgn"ilnder Sections 72, 74, 18 and 79 other than compensaiip,ff.o5...ehvisaged, tf extended to the adjudicating offtcer as p.ryoite\.tfiilq}in our view, may intend to expand the ambit ind tcope ol the,powers and functions of the adiudicating officer under Seet{ia,?l gt#.!W,N,4uld pe.against the mandate of 12.

Hence, in view of t!!'authoritative'pronouncement of the Hon'ble Supreme thorilY has the jurisdiction to Court in the cose=rn'entioned .abolre,,the au compiaint'seeking refund of the amount and interest on the refundamount. ',, ,,.'",=... ..1 the reliC{ sffiht by the complaihants.

E.I Direct the .erporrdaff& f,F--fll fu entire amount paid by the- complainants along ililtt"prestiiUea interest from the date of resp e ctive deposit till. its actual realizatio n' E.II Direct ifr" -rJ*po,.ira"nt to pry intdreit it'th" rate of L4o/o on the Rs.24,03, Sn |:.iaid ai booking/upfront amount' 13.

The above-mentioned 1elip-fs sought by the complainants are being taken together as the findings in one relief will definitely affect the result of the other relief and the same being interconnected' 14. ected' 14.

The factual matrix of case reveals that the complainants had booked a residential unit in the Affordable Group Housing project of the respondent named "Mahira Homes-68" at Sector-68, Gurugram and was allotted a unit bearing no.

804, 8th floor, tower F, having carpet area of 543'72 sq' ft' vide allotment letter dated 03.05.2018.

A buyer's agreement dated 25.06.20t8 Page 11 ofLT - I{ARERE Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 ffiGUI?UGRAM was executed between the parties.

The complainants have paid an amount of Rs.

24,03 ,523 / - against the total sale consideration of Rs.22,24,887 / -.

15.

Clause 1(iv) of the Affordable Housing Policy, 20L3 provides for completion of all such projects licensed under it and the same is reproduced as under for ready reference: 1(iv) "All such projects shall be required to be necessarily completed within 4 years from the date of approval of building plans or grant of envirotnmental clearance, whichever is later.

This date ihatl be're1erred to as the "date of commencement of proiect" for the pur7ose of the PolicY." 16.Due date of handing over sf possession: As per clause 1[iv) of the Affordable Housing policy, 2OL3 it is prescribed that'All such projects shall to be necessarily completed within 4 years from the date of approval of building plans or grant of environmental clearance, whichever is oforrad tn as tl nmencement of later.

This date shall be referred to as the "date of con project" for the purpose of this policy.

The respondent has obtained building plan approval and environment clearance in respect of the said project on23.0Z.Z01B and 05.06.201"8 respectively.

Therefore, the due date of possession is being calculated from the date of environmental clearance, being later.

Furthe[ an extension of 6 months is granted to the respondent in view of notification no. g13-2020 dated 26.05.2020, on account of outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic.

Therefore, the due date of possession comes out to be 05.12.2022.

17. .2022.

17.ln the present complaint, the complainants intends to withdraw from the project and are seeking return of the amount paid by him in respect of subject unit along with interest as per Section 1B(11 of the Act and the same is reproduced below for ready reference:- "section 78: 'Return of amount and compensation 1s(1), If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot, or building' - Page 12 of L7 / ffiHARERA ffi cLJRLToRAM Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 (a) in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or (b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation ofthe registration under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the ollottee wishes to withdrqw from the proiect without preiudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act.

Provided that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the proiect, he s.hqll be paid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delayl:;.01:1,{: ffthfinding over of the possession, at such rate as may be preffilbhi6ii{t*.l1 r t::) 18.

The authority considering th0- dve facts opines that the due date of possession (05.12 20141:$as lapped much b-q&re the time of filing of the | ... ij .#ii ?.r:i _'li I | ,t' . present complaint *ni1fi,:!r$L 20fi$*+{,6p ea i'o.n 18 of the Act is invoked if the promoter is /ffile to ,hdndoVer possesiion of the unit due to : ..,. :i L i::.,: , discontinuance of ; -ubinesB as developer @n,' account of suspension or ,, revocation of regiSt?attpn,un$erllttrf$ Aper=anv other reason then the ,:", , " t allottee shall be eflffid'ke_,5efund1. _,5efund1.of ftd" entire amount paid to the respondent along with pr' ib-Sd,rlffi 0f interest. :::=:= : :j: 19.

It is further observ.ed,that-the,AuthoritI ,,,on 27,05.2022 initiated Suo-Motu =:::::,:. i action against the $iornote+ umdgr SegtlOn 35 of,,the Act, 201.6 based upon the site visit report sqpmitted on 18.05.20?2 wherein it is clearly stated .. . ;: : : 1 that the physical progiess of the project was approximately 15-200/o and progress of construction works did not seem commensurate to the payments withdrawn from the bank accounts.

Moreovel on t7.05.2022 the Director Town & Country Planning blacklisted the said developer from grant of license on account due to various grave violations by the promoter company which was subsequently withdrawn by the department on 21,.07.2022 subject to fulfilment of certain conditions.

Also, on 19.05.2022, Page 13 ofLT { ffiHARERA ffiounuennrrrr "Rule 15, Prescribed rate of interest' [Proviso to section 72, section 78 and sub'section (4) and subsection (7) of section 79 For the purpose of proviso to section 12; section 18; and sub- sections (4) and (7) of section 79, the "interest at the rate Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 all the accounts were freezed by the Authority due to non-compliance of the provisions of the Act,201.6.

On 06.11..2023, the Authority initiated suo-moto revocation proceedings under Section 35 of the Act.

Thereafter; the Authority vide order dated 1,1,.03.2024 revoked the registration certificate of the project under Section 7(1) of the Act, 2016 and accordingly the respondent company shall not be able to sell the unsold inventories in the project and also, the accounts are freezed therefore, this amounts to discontinuation of business of the respondent.

20.

The Authority is of the view that since vide order dated 1,1.03. ed 1,1.03.2024, the registration certificate of the project Stands revoked under section 7[1) of the Act, 2Ot6 and also due to the promoter's serious violations, there seems no possibility of completing the said project in near future.

Thus, the of the view that the complainants are entitled to his right under Section 1Bt1)[b) read with Section t9(4) of the Act of 2016 to claim the refund of amount paid along with interest at prescribed rate from the promoter.

21.

Admissibility of refund at prescribed rate of interest: The complainants are seeking refund of the paid-up amount as per provisions of the Act and rules framed thereunder.

Proviso to Section 18 of the Act provides that where an allottee(sJ intends to withdraw from the project, the promoter shall be liable to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf and it has been prescribed under Rule 15 of the Rules, ibid.

Rule 15 is reproduced as under: Page 14 ofLT ffiHARERA S- cunllGRAM CASCS.

Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 prescribed" shall be the State Bank of India highest morginal cost of lending rate +20/0.: Provided that in case the State Bank of India morginal cost of lending rate (IvlCLR) is not in rtse, it shall be replaced by such benchmark lending rates which the State Bank of India may fix from time to time for lending to the general Public." ZZ.The legislalure in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the Rule 15 of the Rules has determined the prescribed rate of interest.

The rate of interest so determined by the legislature, is reasonable and if the said rule is followed to award the interest,;,i,t,,1vill ensure uniform practice in all the - :.1,i, . .' +.' a ' 23.

Consequenrly, as per website 6f theState Bank of India i.e., https://sbi.co.in, the marginal cost of lending rate [iq short, MCIR) as on date i.e., 23.07.2025 is 9.10%.

Accordinffi Uies.rip,.

Uies.rip,.a;ate of interr:st will be marginal cost of lending vals +20/o i-e; f p.f O o/o;.t :;.'ti' .,..[ ' u,,r';*' the r{g::b$dentls'bbtigatea to re}u#hithe paid-up amount of Rs.

24,O3,SZ3l- recei@bX-it ftons With interest a1'the rate prescribed under :he Harf4qahdit E-state [Regulffih and Development) Rules' ZOLT from the date of dhci,'i|aymgnt,titt tt . "[tual realization of the amount.

ZS.Out of total amount.so asse*e'd;ft altount paid by the bank shall be refunded first in th,b'biank and the balanCe amount along with interest will be refunded to the.eompleip-a{t,,!. i ,i.'"". . , ,,,, ., . t*''lt-;: E.III Direct the resiiondent to pay a eompenrition bf nt.

1 lakh towards legal expenses incurred by the complainants.

E.Mirect the respondent to pay an amount of Rs, 2 lacs to the complainants towards mental and physical harassment.

Z6.The above-mentioned reliefs sought by the complainants are being taken together as the findings in one relief will definitely affect the result of the other relief and the same being interconnected. " ffi ,:il'::T:T,ffi T ;ffi;ffi ',:,;;::;';:;, ; ;#::: Page 15 oflT n/ ffiHARERA ffi* ainuennnl Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 'M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt.

Ltd.

V/s State of Up & Ors.

2027-2022(1) RCR(c), 357'has held that an allottee is entitled to claim compensation & Iitigation charges under sections L2,74,1,8 and section l-9 which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer as per section 71 and the quantum of compensation & litigation expense shall be adjudged by the adjudicating officer having due regard to the factors mentioned in section 22.

The adjudicating officer has exclusive jurisdiction to deal with the complaints in respect of comperystig"__l and legal expenses.

Therefore, the complainants are advised to -qpffiUcf-.the adjudicating officer for seeking the relief of compensation. q{ tr*}s F.

Directions of the AuthoritY: 28.

Hence, the authority hereby prlt.tulhis . t.tulhis .o1{,er and issues the following directions under S.ecf1on 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoi"r ,r per the function entrusted to the authority under Section 3a[f,J: :}; 'ii\:i' 14: lll t;:. lt; iilr , ij ,; 4i-f, ' li I.

The ."rpondurl&t?*ate,1is j,.l1ect$o refund the amount paid bv the complainahti:i.e,, Rsr2+,dA,SZg/-"along with interest at the rate '::::= of LL.lOo/o p.a. as freicribeA-under rule L5 of the Haryana Real Estate (nq$u$ti nd Development). $1le s, 2017 from the date of ll' ":t;;A - -::: l :' ' each payTini tillthe actu.-ql ry4lizatiop of the amount' II.

Out of thd" idtil amount so assessed, the amount paid by the bank be refunded first in the bank and the balance amount along with interest will be refunded to the complainants' III.

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

IV.

The respondent is directed not to create third party right against the unit before full realization of the amount paid by the Page 16 " r, --{1u1o W ffi wlsqd HARERE GUI?UORAM Complaint No.

1678 of 2024 complainants.

If any transfer is initiated with respect to the subject unit, the receivable from that property shall be first utilized for clearing dues of the complainant-allottees.

29, Complaint stands disposed of.

30.

File be consigned to the registry.

Dated: 23.07.2025 (Menfblr) Haryana Real Edfhte RegulatorY Authority, Gurugram PageLT ofLT