MAHESH PRASAD vs SELENE CONSTRUCTION LTD

HARERA S*GURUGRAI/ BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM ORDER 1.

The present complaint dated 08.05.2024 has been filed by the complainant/allottee under section 31 of the Real Estate [Regulation and Development) Act,2016 (in short, the Act) read wirh 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 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 for sale executed lnter se parties. ,r' Complaint no. : Complaint filed on : Date ofdecision : Mahesh Prasad R/o- E-1004, Mahindra Aura, New Palam Vihar, Sector 110A, Gurugram, Haryana.

Versus M/s Selene Construction Limited Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 7556 of 2024 08.0 5.2 024 21.o3.2025 Complainant Address: M-62 &63, First Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi- 110001.

CORAM Shri Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCE: Shri Aasma Sachdeva, (Advocate) Shri Rahul Yadav, fAdvocate) Respondent Member Complainant Respondent Page 1of19 HARERA GURUGRAM Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 A.

Unit and proiect related details 2.

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

N.

Particulars Details 1.

Name ofthe project lndiabulls Centrum Park, Sector 103, Gurugram 2.

Nature of the Droiect Residential complex Area of Project 22.062 acres 4.

RERA Registered/ not registered Registered i.

Centrum Park (Ph'l) vidc Registration no, 11 of 2018 dated 08.01.2 018 Registered area- 39108.8 sq. mtrs part of 22.062 acres Valid upto- 31.07.2018 I I ii.

Centrum Park (Ph-ll) vidc I Registration no. lo ot 20lB ddted I oa.o r.zo ra I Registered area- 56220 sq. mtrs I part of 22.052 acres I Valid upto- 31.10. to- 31.10.2018 5.

DTCP License no.

252 of 2007 dated 02.17.2007 50 of 2011 dated 05.06.2011 63 of 2072 dated 1.9.06.2072 Valid up to 07.LL.2024 04.06.202+ 78.06.2024 Licensed area 17.08 acres 1.92 acres 3.03 acres 6.

Unit no.

R101, 10tr Floor, Tower R [As per space buyer's agreement at page 31 of comDlaint'l 7.

Unit area admeasuring 1423 sq. ft. (super area) 1089 sq. ft. (covered area) [As per space buyer's agreement at pagc 3l of complaintl PaEeZ of 19 r/ HARERA ffiGURUGRAM Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 r' B.

Date ofbooking 26.07 .2014 [As mentioned in Applicant Ledger at page 23 of comPlaintl- 9.

Date of buyer's agreement 29.t0.2074 lPase 26 of complaintl 10.

Possession clause 21.

The Developer shall endeovor to complete the construction of the soid building/lJnit within a period ol three years, with an six months groce period thereon from the dqte of execution of the Flot Buyers Agreement subiect to timely payment by the Buyer(s) of the Total Slae Price poyable according to the Payment PIan opplicable to him or as demanded by the Developer.... lPase 36 ofcomplaintl 11.

Due date of possession 29.04.2078 [Note: Grace period of 6 months is included being unqualified and unconditionall 72.

Basic Sale Consideration Rs.80,76,500/- [As per Applicant Ledger dated 23.02.2018 at page 54 ofcomPlaintl Total sale consideration Rs.87 ,67 ,4351- [As per Applicant Ledger dated 23.02.2018 at paae 54 of comPlair4l 13.

Amount paid by the complainant Rs.2I,93,616 /- [Ar per Applicant Ledger dated 23,02.2018 at pase 54 ofcomplaintl 1+.

Occupation certificate 05.02.2018 lAs per DTCP websitel 15.

Letter ofpossession 23.02.2078 lPase 56 of complaintl 16. lntimation of termination proceedings sent by the respondent to the complainant vide letter t8.04.2020 IPage 73 ofcomplaint] Page 3 of19 Complaint No.

1555 oF 2024 B, 3.

HARERA ffi"GURUGIIAI/ dated t7.

Cancellation letter dated 26.0s.2020 IPage 74 of complaint] Note: Vide said letter, entire amount paid by (he complainant i.e, Rs. t i.e, Rs.z1,93,615 was forfeited by the respondent.

18.

Legal Notice sent by comDlainant on the 30.05.2020 19.

Reply to the legal notice was sent by the respondent on 1,0.07.2020 IPage 89 of complaint] Facts ofthe complaint The complainant has made the following submissions in the complaint: i.

That in the year 2014, the complainant and his son, namely Mr.

Manish Kumar Gaurav approached the respondent as they were willing to purchase a ready to move in apartment for residential purpose.

The official of the respondent company represented a rosy picture of the proiect to the complainant and his son and assured them that if they purchase 2 [t!vo) units in the project, they would be eligible for great discounts. ii.

That complainant and his son explicitly informed an official of the respondent company namely Mr.

Satin Nagpal (hereinafter referred to as "Official No.

L"J that they were doubtful about purchasing 2 units because of their financial condition.

However, the Official No. l promised that in the event they faced any difficulties with respect to making payments, the respondent would adjust the total amount paid by them towards one [1J unit iii.

That lured by the promises, representations and personal guarantees made by the Official No.

1, the complainant and his son Page 4 of19 HARERA ffiGURUGRAM lv. agreed to purchase two [2) units in the project.

Subsequently, the complainant paid the booking amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on 26.07.2074 towards the unit.

0n 17.1,0.2014, the Flat Buyer Agreement was executed between the respondent and complainant and he was allotted a unit bearing no.

R 101 on 1Oth floor in Tower R having approx.

1,423 sq. ft. of super area in the project and the total projected cost ofthe unit was Rs.

80,76,500/.

In terms of the Agreement, the respondent company had to complete the construction of the proiect within 3 years from the date of execution of the fgriqment, and subsequently offer the possession of the units. the units.

Theiefore, the respondent company had to deliver the possession of the units by or before 0ctober 2017.

It is pertinent to mention that as per the Agreement, the complainant timely paid 25% of the total consideration towards the unit and till date the complainant has paid the amount of Rs.

21,93,61,61- towards the unit.

The respondent had to deliver the possession of the unit to the complainant by or before October 2017,however, the respondent failed to provide the possession of the units to the complainant.

Subsequently, the complainant approached the respondent to raise his concerns regarding the delay in providing the possession, to which the officials of the respondent company promised that the possession of the units would be provided to him at the earliest.

After several follow-ups by the complainant regarding the delay in delivering the possession of the units, the respondent issued the notice of possession to the complainant in February 2018. v.

That in March 2018, the complainant and his son informed an official of the respondent that they were facing certain financial Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 Page 5 of 19 HARERA ffiGURUGRAM hardships and requested to arrange a meeting as they wished to cancel their booking however, none of the officials of the respondent company reverted to the complainant and his son.

As there was no response from the respondent's side for almost a month, the complainant visited the project site in May and fune 2018.

Both times, when the complainant went to the site of the project, none ofthe officials ofthe respondent provided them with the keys to visit the units, despite several requests.

Further, while the complainant and his son were at the site, they noticed that the internal roads in front of tower P and R were not ready, and the construction was still going on.

The complainant was shocked to see the same as the respondent had offered the possession to the complainant and his son in February 2018. uary 2018.

The complainant then conveyed to an official of the respondent that it was impossible for the complainant to take possession as the roads were not built and construction had not been completed.

Further, the complainant again requested the official of the respondent to set up a meeting so that the complainant and his son could find a solution.

However, the official of the respondent again told the him that someone would contact them with respect to the same.

That vide email dated 27.08.2078, the Complainant and his son requested the management that belonging to middle class, they are incapable to complete the payment for both the units as stated by them since inception.

Further, to add to the disappointment of the complainant, vide email dated 16.08.2018, an official of the respondent asked the complainant to pay Rs.

80,31,044/ which included the interest amount.

Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 vl, Page 6 of 19 r/' SHARERA # aJRUGRAM VIII, vll.

1556 of 2024 That the Complainant and his son were let down again as vide email dated 27.OA.2018, Ms.

Vidhi, an official of the respondent (hereinafter referred to as "Official No.

2"J completely disregarded and out rightly refused their requests.

That the Official No.2 informed in the email that the refund/merging of the booked units is not possible, thereby refuting to organize a meeting with the higher authorities to reach an amicable solution.

Further, it was acknowledged in the email that the road in front of the P and R tower got completed after |une 2018, even though the possession was offered to the Complainant and his son in February 2018.

That on 18.04.2020, the respondent company maliciously sent complainant, the lntimation of Termination Proceedings letters.

On 26.05.2020, the Respondent maliciously issued the Termination and Forfeiture Letter to the complainant. mplainant.

It was quite apparent that respondent maliciously lured Complainant and his son into purchasing two units despite being well- aware of their financial constraints and took undue advantage of that.

That the complainant even issued a Legal Notice on 30.06.2020 to the respondent requesting it to refund the entire amount of Rs.

43,87 ,232/- paid by them towards the purchase of both the units and to withdraw the Termination and Forfeiture letter issued to the complainant.

The respondent vide Reply dated 10.07.2020 to above Legal Notice, blatantly disregarded the requests of the complainant and refused to comply with any of the requests as mentioned in the legal notice. lx. x.

That aggrieved by the conduct ofthe respondent, the complainant approached the civil courts on 04.09.2020 vide suit bearing no.

CS/150612020, however, the said suit was withdrawn by the PaEe 7 o( 19 HARERA *@*GURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 complainant so that they could approach REt{A for seeking justice.

Thereafter, in 1dy,2023 the complainant had approached this Hon'ble Authority with a complaint bearing no.

3378 /2023 against the respondent for seeking refund, however, the same was dismissed by this Hon'ble Authority vide order dated 01.03.2024 on technical grounds and the complainant was granted the liberty to file a fresh complaint.

Hence, this complaint.

C, 4.

Relief sought by the complainant: The complainant has sought following relief(s). i.

Direct the respondent to refund the entire amount paid by the complainant i.e., Rs.

21,93,616/- along with RERA rate of interest per annum from the date offirst payment i.e., July 2014. ii.

Any other relief which this Hon'ble Authority deems fir for deciding the present complaint.

5.

0n the date of hearing, the authority explained to the respondent/promoter about the contraventions as alleged to have been committed in relation to section 11(aJ(al of the Act to plead guilty or not to plead guilty. ad guilty.

Reply by the respondent: The respondent has contested the complaint on the following grou nds: i.

That the complainant has not come with clean hand before this Authority and has concealed the true and material facts supplying false and fabricated information in the complaint.

As such the complainant is guilty of concealing the true and material facts, hence, the complainant is not entitled for any relief whatsoever claimed by his from this Authority. ii.

That the payment plan opted by the complainant was 25:75 Payment Plan i.e., 25 7o was to be paid at the time of booking and D.

6.

Page B of 19 HARERA #*GURUGRAM Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 II.

75o/o was to be paid at the time of offer of possession. 'Ihe complainant failed to timely pay the 250/o of the initial payment and never paid the balance 750lo of the payment to the respondent.

That the complainant is alleging that the possession of the subject unit bearing No.

R101 booked in said project was not offered in terms of the Flat Buyers Agreement dated 29.1.0.2074 and as such refund is claimed by the complainant by the present Complaint.

However, the said allegations are wrong and denied.

However, the respondent after obtaining Occupational Certificate for the tower wherein the unit was booked by the complainant, offered possession of the unit in question to the complainant vide letter dated 23.02.2018 well within the committed time period and was called upon to take the physical possession of the unit after remitting the balance sale consideration amount due towards the said unit.

That it is incorrect that the possession was delayed as alleged in the complaint.

Further the complainant, in spite of offer of possession failed to make the balance payment due towards the sale consideration of the unit and failed to take physical possession of their unit.

That the complainant at the time of execution of the Flat Buyers Agreements dated 29.70. ted 29.70.2074 specifically agreed to Clause 10 of the Agreement which states that timely payment of the instalments/ amounts due shall be the essence of the Agreement, and in the event, the buyers/ Complainant fails to make payment within the stipulated time or breaches any of the terms and conditions of the Agreement, the Agreement shall be cancelled. lv, Page 9 of19 ffiHARERA # arn[enntrl Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 That upon failure of the complainant to make payments, the respondent issued reminder letters dated 07.02.2020, 04.01..2020 and 21.06.2019, 15.10.2018 requesting the complainant to clear the outstanding dues towards the unit but the complainant avoided the letters and failed to clear its due outstanding.

That only upon the failure of the complainant to clear its due outstanding's, the respondent was forced to send Letter dated 18.04.2020 i.e.

Intimation of Termination Proceedings calling the complainant to clear its outstanding dues of Rs.

1,02,65.7+01' within 15 days failing which their provisional allotment in the unit shall stand cancelled.

The said fact is undisputed and admitted by the complainant in the present Complaint.

However, the complainant failed to clear the outstanding amounts within the stipulated time despite repeated reminder(s), as such the respondent was left with no option, vide letter daled 26.06.2020 terminated the provisional allotment of the complainant in terms of clause 9 of the Agreement, and further in terms of clause 9 of the agreement, forfeited the amount paid by the complainant, That for the sake for arguments without admission, despite taking into consideration the submissions and legal prepositions made by the respondent in the preceding paras, still if this Hon'ble Authority feels inclined to allow the claim of the complainant taking a sympathetic view, in such scenario refund, if any, be allowed sublect to deductions as per the cancellation clause of the agreement executed for the unit in question and statutory Dues utory Dues/ Taxes paid on behalf of the complainant to the Concerned Authorities for the unit in question by the Respondent.

That since the said amount was neither retained by the respondent nor is vl.

Page 10 of19 HARERA ffiGURUGRAM recoverable from the concerned department/authorities.

Thus, the complainant should not get undue benefits of the same. vii.

That vide order dated 2A.09.2021 passed by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Panchkula in complaint bearing no.

384 of 2021 was pleased to decide the matter on the same observation as pleaded above.

The same observation is also taken by this Hon'ble Authority in Complalnt No.

2253 of 2018 itled as "Major General Bhaskar Kalita & AnL vs, Selene Constructions Limited'decided on 26,03,2019 wherein the respondent was granted liberty to adjust the amount paid by the Customer/ Complainant towards the service tax and other taxes deposited with the concerned authorities.

Further, the Hon'ble RERA Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in the Appeal bearing no.

347 of 2079 litled, as "Major General Bhaskar Kalita & Anr.

Vs.

The Haryana ReaI Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram Haryana & lnr." against the aforesaid directions of the Hon'ble Authority, wherein the Hon'ble Tribunal while dismissing the Appeal vide order dated 23.12.2019 upheld the observation passed by the Hon'ble Authority.

That in view of the observations taken by this Hon'ble Authority and same being upheld by the Hon'ble RERA Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh, the respondent is entitled to adjust the Govt. dues passed on the concern Govt.

Departments for the unit in question. viii.

That a bare perusal ofthe complaint will sufficiently elucidate that the complainant has miserably failed to make a case against the respondent.

The complainant has merely alleged in his complaint about delay on part of the respondent in handing over of possession but has failed to substantiate the same.

The fact is that Complaint No. plaint No.

1556 of 2024 Page 11 ol19 HARERA ffiGURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 the respondent has been acting in consonance with the Buyers Agreement executed for the unit and no contravention in terms of the same can be projected on the respondent.

That the complainant has made false and baseless allegations with a mischievous intention to retract from the agreed terms and conditions duly agreed in FBA entered into between the parties.

In view of the same, there is no cause of action in favour of the complainant to institute the present complaint, 7.

The complainant as well as the respondent has filed written arguments and the same have been taken on record.

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

E. lurisdiction ofthe authority 8.

The authority has complete territorial and subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given below.

E.l Territorialiurisdiction 9.

As per notification no.

1-/92/2077-ITCP dated 14.1'2.201'7 issued by Town and Country Planning Department, Haryana the iurisdiction of Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gurugram district for all purposes.

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.ll Subiect-matter iurisdiction 10.

Section 11(4)(a) ofthe 4ct,2016 responsible to the allottee as per is reproduced as hereunder: provides that the promoter shall be agreement for sale.

Section 11[4J(aJ Page 12 of19 HARERA ffiGURUGRAM complaint No.

1555 of 2024 Section 71 (4) The promoter sholl' (o) be responsible for all obligotions, responsibilities ond functions under the provisions oI this Act or the rules qnd regulations made thereunder or to t er or to the ollottees os per the agreement for sole, or to the qssociation of qllottees, as the cose moy be, till the conveyance of all the qportments, plots or buildings, as the cose may be, to the ollottees, or the common areas to the association of ollottees or the competent outhority, as the case moy be; Section 34-Functions of the Authority: 34A of the Act provides to ensure compliqnce oI the obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees ond the reol estote agents under this Act and the rules qnd regulotions made thereunder.

11.

So, in view of the provisions of the 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 adiudicating officer if pursued by the complainant at a later stage.

F.

F.I Findings on the relief sought by the complainant: Direct the respondent to refund the entire amount paid by the complainant i.e., Rs.

21,93,616/- along with RERA rate of interest per annum from the date of first payment i.e., July 2014.

Briefly, the facts ofthe case are that the unit bearing no.

R101, 1Oth Floor, Tower R was allotted in favour of complainant by the respondent and thereafter the buyer's agreement was executed between the complainant and the respondent on 29.10,2014.

The complainant has paid an amount of Rs.

2t,93,6161- against the basic sale consideration of Rs.80,76,500/-.

As per clause 21 of the agreement, the respondent was required to hand over possession of the unlt within a period of 36 months from the date of execution of the buyer's agreement with a grace period of 6 months.

Therefore, the due date of possession comes out to be 29.04.2078.

Subsequently, the 72.

Page 13 of 19 ffiHARERA ffi arnLrennl,r Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 possession of the subject unit was offered to the complainant on 23.02.207A after receipt of occupation certificated by the competent authority on 05.02.2018.

5.02.2018.

Thereafter, the respondent has issued various reminder/demand letters to the complainant and requested to pay the outstanding dues but the complainant has failed to pay the same due to financial hardship.

Due to non-payment of the outstanding dues, the respondent has cancelled the unit vide letter dated 26.05.2020 vide which the respondent has forfeited the entire amount paid by the complainant.

13.

The respondent submitted that the complainant is a defaulter and has failed to make payment as per the agreed payment plan, Various reminders dated 07.02.2020, 04.01.2020, 21.06.2019, 15,10.2018 and final opportunity was given to the complainant vide letter dated 78.04.2020 and thereafter the unit was cancelled vide letter dated 26.05.2020.

The complainant failed to abide by the terms of the agreement to sell executed inter-se parties by defaulting in making payments in a time bound manner as per payment schedule.

Now, the question before the authority is whether this cancellation is valid or not?

L4.

The authority has gone through agreed between the parties and ready reference: the payment plan which was duly the same is reproduced below for PLP 25:75 Pavment Plan On Bookins l Lakh Within 30 days from the booking date 100/0 of Sale Price + 100/0 of EDC/IDC (less booking amount) Within 60 davs from the bookins date 150/0 ofSale Price + 1570 ofEDC/lDC 0n Offer ofPossession 75% of Safe Price + 7,Yo of EDC/IDC + Maintenance Security + Club Charses Page 14 of19 HARERA ffi.GURUGRAI/ Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 t5.

It is matter of record that the complainant booked the aforesaid unit under the above-mentioned payment plan and paid an amount of Rs.

21,93,616/- towards total consideration of Rs.

80,76,500/- which constitutes 27.160/o of the total sale consideration.

Rest of the 7 5o/o payment was payable at the time of offer of possession.

The respondent has obtained the occupation certificate in respect of the allotted unit of the complainant on 05.02. on 05.02.2018 and thereafter, the possession of the same was offered on 23.02.201,8.

16.

It is pertinent to mention here that the complainant is alleging th ng that the respondent has not merged the pa he payments made by the complainant and his son for both the units.

But, the complainant has failed to substantiate the same as there is not even a single document on record whereby the respondent was obligated to merge the two units purchased by the complainant and his son.

Thus, there is no merit in this contention of the complainant.

17.

It is pertinent to mention here that as per section 19(6) & 19(7) of Act, the allottee is under obligation to make payments towards consideration of allotted unit as per agreement to sale executed inter se parties.

The respondent after giving reminders dated 29.08.2018, 31.05.2018, 15.10.2018, 21.06.2079, 04.07.2020, 07.02.2020 for making payment for outstanding dues as per payment plan, has cancelled the subject unit.

Despite issuance of aforesaid numerous reminders, the complainant has failed to take possession and clear the outstanding dues.

The respondent has given sufficient opportunity to the complainant before proceeding with termination of allotted unit.

Thereafter, the respondent issued "lntimation of Termination Proceedings" dated 18.04.2020, and the relevant proportion of the said notice is reproduce as under: Page 15 of 19 *HARERA S-eunuennr'r Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 "tt is therefore evident that you ore not interested in continuing with the provisionol reservation of the soid unit.

Pleose take note that in the event thot you fail to moke entire payment of the outstanding dues within 15 days from the dote of this letter, the provisional reservotion of the soid unit shall stand terminoted ond the monies paid by you shqll stand Ioteited os per the terms ofAgreement." 18. ment." 18.

Further, as per clause 9 of buyer's agreement, the respondent /promoter has right to cancel the unit and forfeit the earnest money where allottee fails to perform its obligations or fulfil all terms and conditions set out in this Agreement.

Clause 10 of the said Agreement, the allottee was under obligation to make timely payment of instalments.

Clause 9 and 10 of the buyer's agreement are reproduced under for ready reference: 9, The Developer and the Buyer hereby ogree that the eornest money for the purpose of this Flat Buyers Agreement sholl be colculated @15% of the Total Selling Price of the Unit.

The Buyer hereby outhorizes the Developer to forfeit the eornest money along with the interest and cost on deloyed payments in cose of non-fulfillment of the terms and conditions herein contained.

10.

Timely Pawent of the lnstallments /amounts due shall be of the essence of this Agreement.

U pqyment is not made within the period stipulated ond or the Buyer commits breach of any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, then this Agreement shall be liable to be cancelled. ln the eventuolity of cancellation, eornest money being 15% of the Totol Selling Price would be forfeited ond the bolonce, if ony, would be refundable without interesL On mncellation of the Agreement, the Buyer shall also be liable tp reimburse to the developer the omount of brokerage paid, if any, by the Developer towards the booking of the Unit ln any case, all the dues, whatsoever including interest, ifany, shall be payoble before taking possession ofthe Unit." 19.

That the above-mentioned clause of the Agreement provides that the promoter has right to terminate the allotment in respect of the unit upon default by the allottee under the said agreement.

Further, the respondent company has already obtained the occupation certificate for the project of the allotted unit on 05.02.2018 and offered the possession on 23.02.2078.

3.02.2078.

Despite the issuance of offer of possession after obtaining 0C, the complainant has failed to take possession of the subiect unit and clear the outstanding dues. / Page 16 ol l9 ffiHARERA #*eunuenRl,r Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 Regulatory Authority Gurugram [Forfeiture of earnest money by the builder) Regulations, 11(5) of 2018, was farmed providing as under: "5.

AMOUNT OF EARNEST MONEY Scenario prior to the Resl Estate (Regulotions ond Development) Act, 2016 was dwrent.

Frauds were carried out without ony feor as there was no law for the some but now, in view of the obove facts and toking into consideration the judgements of Hon'ble Notional Consumer Disputes Redressol Commission ond the Hon'ble Supreme Court of lndio, the authoriy is of the view that the forfeiture qmount of the earnest money shall not exceed more than 70o/o of the considerqtion omount of the reol estate i.e, apartment/plot/building os the cose may be in all cases where the concellation of the flot/unit/plot is made by the builder in a unilateral manner,Qt the buyer intends to withdrow from the project and tityl sgigernsrs contqining ony clause contrqry to the oforesoid regulations shall be void ond not binding on the buyer." 22.

Also, Hon'ble Apex Court in Civil Appeal no.3334 of 2023 titled as Godrej Projects Development Limited Versus Anil Karlekar decided on 03.02,2025 has held ihat 10% of BSP is reasonable amount, which is liable to be forfeited as earnest money.

23.

So, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court and provisions of regulation 11 of 2018 framed by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram, the respondent/promoter cannot retain more than 1070 of basic sale consideration as earnest money on cancellation.

So, the respondent is directed to refund amount received from the complainants after deducting 10% of the basic sale consideration and return the reaming amount along with interest at prescribed rate i.e.

11. e i.e.

11.10% from the date of cancellation i.e., 26.05.2020 till the actual date of refund of the amount within the timelines provided in rule 16 of the Haryana Rules 2017 ibid.

G.

Directions ofthe authority 24.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of Page 18 of 19 ffi FIAREBA ffi euRuenRvt Complaint No.

1556 of 2024 obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function entrusted to the authority under section 34(f]: i.

The respondent is directed to refund the amount received by the complainant i.e., Rs.

21,93,616/- after deducting 10% of the basic sale consideration of Rs.80,76,500/- being earnest money along with interest at the rate of 11.10% (the State Bank of lndia highest marginal cost of lending rate (MCLRJ applicable 35 6n fl31s +2yo) as Development) Rules, the date of cancellation i.e., 26.05.2020 till the actual of the amount. ii.

A period of 90 days ndent to comply with the directions given which legal consequences would follow.

Complaint stands File be consigned \"{ ')< Ztt. , Gurugram Dated:21.03.2025 -r-'r:ls Page 19 of19