RITIKA JAIN vs SUNRAYS HEIGHTS PVT. LTD.

NAME OF THE BUILDER SUNRAYS HEIGHTS PRIVATE LIMITED PROJECT NAME "63 Golf Drive" at Sector 634, Gurugram, Haryana Sr.

No.

Case No.

Case title Appearance 1. cR/2038/2024 Apoorva Verma Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Singh Shri Tushar Bahmani 2. cR/1.301,/2024 Anuja Vijay Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Dheeraj Gupta Shri t,alit Kumar, AR 3. cR/L302/2024 Pradeep Kumar Vijay Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited and Ors.

Shri Dheeraj Gupta Shri Lalit Kumar, AR 4. cR/2040/202+ Rashi Kapoor Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Singh Shri Tushar Ilahmani 5. cR/2043/2024 Mandeep Chowdhary Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Srngh ShriTushar Flahmani 6.

CR/2050/202t+ Ritika Jain Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Singh Shri Tushar llahrnani 7. cR/2089/2024 Vishruta Mattu Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Srngh Shri Tushar Bahmani 8. cR/zzss/2024 fai Prakash Sharma Vs.

Sunrays Heights Private Limited Shri Vijay Pratap Srngh Shri Tushar Bahmani CORAM: Shri Ashok Sangwan ORDER 1,.

This order shall dispose of the aforesaid complaints titled abovc filed bcforc: this authority under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Page 1 ot27 ffiHARERA ffi GURUoRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Date of decision: 07 .05.2025 Member Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of 2024 HARERA ffiGURUGI?AM Development] Act, 201,6 [hereinafter referred as "the Act") read with Ilule 2B of the Haryana Real Estate [Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred as "the rules") for violation of Section 11( )[a) of the Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be rcsponsiblc for all its obligations, responsibilities and functions to the allottees a.s pcr thc agreement for sale executed inter se between parties.

2. arties.

2.

The core issues emanating from them are similar in naturc and thc complainant[sJ in the above referred matters are allottees of the projcct, namely, "sixty-Three Golf Drive" situated at Sector-63 A, Gurugram being developed by the same respondent/promoter i.e., Sunrays Heights private Limited.

The terms and conditions of the buyer's agreements and the fulcrurn of the issue involved in all these cases pertain to failure on the part of thc promoter to deliver timely possession of the units in question, seeking possession of the unit along with delayed possession charges.

3' The details of the complaints, status of reply, unit no., date of agrecrncnt, possession clause, due date of possession, total sale consideration, totarl paicl amount, and relief sought are given below: Proiect Name and Location "63 Colf Orive" at Sector Gurugram, Haryana Proiect area 9.70L5625 acres DTCP License No. and validity 82 of 2014 dated 08.08.2014 Valid up to 37.1.2.2023 RERA Registered or Not Registered Registered Registration no.

249 of 201 26.09.2017 valid up to 25.09.

Date of approval of building plans 10.03.2015 Date of environment clearance 16.09.201,6 Possession Clause 4.

Possession "4.L The developer shall end handover possession of the said flr 63A, 7 dated 2022 tdeavour to Jlat within a Page 2 of 27 d Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1,302, ZO4O, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of 2024 ffi ffi HARERA GUI?UGI?AM Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 3OZ, ZO4O, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 t the bject v the n, in t the Page 3 of27 be he of of tf period of four years i.e., 48 months from tht date of commencement of the project, subjecr to force majeure and timely poyment by the allottee towards the sale consideration, ir, accordance with the terms stipuloted in the present agreement." _ *As per affordable housing policy ZOl3 "1(iv) All such projects shall be required to be necessarily completed within 4 years from the approval of building plons or grant oJ environmentol clearance, whichever whichever is later.

This date sholl be referred to as the "date oJ commencement of project" for the purpose pJthis policy.

The license shall not be renewerl be:ygnd the said 4 years from the date oJ co,fnrne n c e m en t o f p ro i e c t. " Due date of possession 16.03.2021 (Calculated from the date ol' environment clearance being later including gracc periocl of 6 months in lieu of Covid-19') Occupation certificate 3r.12.2024 Sr.

Complaint No., Case Title, and Date of filing of complaint Unit no. & size Date of execution of BBA Total Sale Consideration / Total Amount paid by the complainant Offer of possession 1. cR/2038/2024 Apoorva Verma Vs.

Sunrays Heights Pvt.

Ltd.

DOF: 13.05.2024 Replv: 08.1.0.2024 Carpet area.

356.18 sq. ft.

Balcony area.

69.84 sq. ft.

L9, Tower H 31.1.2,2018 BSP-Rs.

14,59,640/- 'Page 33 of' :omplaint) tP-Rs.

1,3,80,371/- 'Page 66 of reply) Not Olfered Publication of cancellation in newspaper: 21.06.2024 Not Olferecl Publication in newspaper: 21.06.2024 IPage 58 ol reply 2. cR/t3ot/2024 Anuja Vijay Vs.

DOF:10.04.2024 Reply: 78.10.2024 71, Tower H Carpet area.

356.18 sq, ft.

01.07,201,6 fPage 33 of complaint) BSP-Rs.

74,59,640 /- iPage 47 of plaint) {P-Rs.

12,85,486/ '.Page 62 of reply) HARERA P- GUI?UGI?AM Page 4 ol27 Complaint No, 2038, 1301, 1302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 3. cR/1302/2024 Pradeep Kumar Vijay Vs.

Sunrays Heights Pvt, Ltd. and Ors.

DOF:10.04.2024 Reply: L8.L0.2024 38, Tower H Carpet area.

69,84 sq. ft.

07.07.201,6 (Page 40 of complaint) BSP-Rs, 1,4,59,640/- 'Page 54 of :omplaint) tP-Rs.

12,85,486/- '.Page 66 of reply) Not Olfered Publication in newspaper: 21.06.2024 (Page 64 ol rcply) 4. cR/204O/2024 Rashi Kapoor Vs.

DOF:13.05.2024 Reply: 20.11.2024 123, Tower C Carpet area.

356,18 sq. ft, Balcony area.

21.08. ft.

21.08.2018 As stated by respondent at page 06 of inant that nt in 2018, however no date specifiedl BSP-Rs.

24,67,870/- (Page 33 of complain AP-Rs.

23,75,018/- (Page 68 of reply) , Not Ollcrecl Publication in newspaper: 21,.06.2024 fi']age 64 of reply) 5. cR/2043/2024 Mandeep Chowdhary Vs.

Sunrays Heights Pvt, Ltd.

DOF:13.05.2024 Reply: 20.11.2024 29.03.201,6 (Page 21 of complaint) ISP-Rs.24,66,8701 Page 34 of complaint) \P-Rs.

22,45,862 /- Page 66 of reply) Not Oltcled Publication in newspaper: 21.06.2024 (l'}a6ie 62 ol rcpll') 6. cR/2O50/2024 Ritika Jain Vs.

DOF:13.05.2024 Reply: 20.1,1,.2024 41, Tower G Carpet area.

69.84 sq. ft. and by respondent at page 06 of reply) (As agreed by complainant at page B of complaint ISP-Rs.

14,59,6+0/- Page 33 of :omplaint) {P-Rs.

13,80,371,1- '.Page 66 of reply j Not Offered Publication in newspaper: 2t.06.2024 (Pagc 64 ot re.ply') Cancellation Letter: 22.04.2024 7. cR/2089/2024 Vishruta Mattu Vs.

DOFr13.05.2024 Reply: 20.11.2024 21, Tower A Carpet area.

04.02.2016 As agreed by complainant at page 07 of complaint and by respondent at page 06 of reply) BSP-Rs. \4,59,6+01- .Page 38 of ;omplaint) tP-Rs.

13,29,2801- Page 66 of reply) Not Offered Publication in newspaper: 21.06.2024 (Page 62 ot reply) 107, Tower A Carpet area 604.83 sq. ft.

Balcony area 95.10 sq. ft. ffiHARERA ffi ouRUGttAM B. cR/22s5/2024 Jai Prakash Sharma Vs.

DOF222.05.2024 Replv: 20.tL.2024 54, Tower F Carpet area, 366.25 sq. ft.

Balcony area, 69.84 sq. ft.

2016 (Neither any specific date mentioned nor stamp paper attached- Page 34 of reply) BSP-Rs.

14,65,000/- [Page 83 of replyJ {P-Rs.

13,29,280/- '.Page 66 of reply) Not 0l'fcrt:ci Publication in newspaper: 21.06.2024 IPage B0 oi reply) The complainant herein is seeking the following reliefs: 1, Direct the respondent to pay interest @ 8. erest @ 8.650/o per annum as per the prevailing M( paid amount of Rs.13,80,371/- for delay period starting from 1s.03.2021 till the ; physical possession or offer of possession plus 2 month after obtaining OC, whic per the provisions of the Act.

2' Direct the respondent not to cancel or create any third-parry interest on allotte handover actual physical possession of the unit after obtaining OC from the compr 3.

To issue the last demand as per Haryana Affordable Housing Policy towards consic flat in order to make the payment 4.

The Authority to guide as to in wfriifr bank account complainant should deposit las by respondent as escrow aeaouut of. r-espondent is freezed by Authority vid t2.02.2024.

5.

Direct the respondent to tet the copy ofapplication for OC as such the responder have applied for 0C.

6' Change the address of the complainant to that mentioned in the memo of parties as the respondent has notibhqnged the previous address.

Note: In the table referred above certain abbreviations have been used- Tt ey a.e etuf,, Abbreviation Full form DOF Date of filingof complaint DPC Delayed possession charges TSC Total sale consideration , AP Amount paid by the allottee/s CD Conveyance deed )LR plus 270 on thc' tctual handover oi hever is earlier, as d unit and further )tent authority. leratron ol the saicl ;t demand if raised e its order dated rt claims that they despite rcnr indcrs rrated as lollows: 4.

The aforesaid complaints were filed by the complainant-allottee[s) against the promoter on account of violation of the builder buyer's agreement Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302 ,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and2255 of 2024 rties in respect of subject unit for not handing over e date, seeking the delayed possession charges and executed between the possession by further directions to the respondent to complete and seek necessary governmental clearances regarding infrastructural and othcr facilitics including road, water, sewerage and electricity. ectricity.

It has been decided to treat the said complaints as an application for non, compliance of statutory obligations on the part of the respondent in terms of Section 34(f) of the Act which mandates the authority [o ensure compliancc Page 5 of27 5. ffiHARERA ffi GURUGrIAM Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302, 2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of Z0Z4 of the obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottee(s) and the real estate agents under the Act, the rules and the regulations made thereunder.

6.

The facts of all the complaints filed by the complainant- allortee(s) are similar.

Out of the above-mentioned cases, the particulars of lead case CR/2038/2024 titled as "Apooma Verma Vs.

Sunrays Heights private Limited" are being taken into consideration for determining the rights of the allottee(s) qua the relief sought by them.

A.

Project and unit related details 7.

The particulars of the project, the details of sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainant[s), date <t'fpir5posed handing over the possession, delay period, if any, have been detailed in the following tabular form: ru Verma Vs, Details Sixty-Three Golf Drive", 5.9 acres e Group Housin 82 of 201,4 dated 08.08.2014 Valid upro 07.08.201,9 038/2024 -',, Registered 249 of 2017 dat94 ?0.09.2077 31,.t2,2018 L8 ofcom 3L.12.20t8 (As agreed by complainant at page H-19, Tower H (1BHK-Type A) Allotment letter at page LB of com CarpetArea- 356.18 sq. ft Balcony Area- 69.84 sq. ft.

Allotment letter at paqe 1B of com Private Limited" Band9ol 06 of repl Page 6 of 27 rays Heignts ivt.

Ltd., Smr.

Kiran W/o .ram Name of the Nature of the DTPC License no. and Name of li RERA details Allotment letter Builder Buyer Agreement Unit no.

Unit area admeasuring ,, and by respondent at MHARERA ffieunuenntr,r Complaint No,2038, 1301, I 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and Z2SS of2OZ4 4.

Possession "4.1.

The developer shall endeavour to handover possession of the said flat within a period of four years i.e. years i.e., 48 months from the date of commencement of the project, subject to force majeure ond timely poyment by the qllottee towards the sale considerotion, in sccordance with the terms stipulated in the present agreemenL.,, *As per affordable hou _ "7(iv) All such projects shall be required Lo be necessarily completed within 4 years from the approval of building plans or grant of environmental clearence, whichever is later, shall be referred to as the "date of of project" for the purpose of this policy.

The licences shall not be renewed lteyond the said 4 years period from the date ol L0.03.2015 [Page 42 of reply) 1.6.09.201,6 48 of replyJ L6.03.2021, [Calculated from date of environmcnt clearances i.e.,16.09.2016 being later, which comes out ro be 1.6.09.2020 + 6 months as per IIARL.,RA on no.

9/3-2020 dated 26.05.2020 for Rs.14,59,640 /- (as per BBA at page 33 of complaint) Rs.13,80,371, /- fas per Payment Plan Detail Report at page 66 of re L4.05.2024 [Page 60 of reply) 21.06.2024 (Page 62 of reply) 31,.1,2.2024 PageT of27 10.

Possession clause Date of building plan approval Date of environment clearance Due date of possession Sale consideration Amount paid by the complainant Final Reminder letter sent by respondent to complainant Publication of cancellation in tion certificate projects having completion date on or alier.

25.03.2020, or account oi f'orce majeurc conditions due to outbreak of Covid- 19 commencement / HARERA GUIlUGl?AM Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 (Taken from another file olthe same pr fApplied on 08.L 2.2023) L9.

Offer of possession Not offered i"ieCit I I I ___l I)age B of 27 / B.

B.

Facts of the complaint The complainant has made following submissions in the complaint: a) That the respondent made advertisement in the newspaper 'Hindustan Times'with regard to the location, specification and amenities and timc of completion of the project under the name affordable group housing colony commonly known a ly known as "63 Golf- Drive" floated under l{aryana Government's Affordable Housing Policy, located at Sector 63A, Gurgaon, Haryana. b) That the complainant approached to the respondent for booking of a unit vide application bearing no SGD(A)-0135, having carpet area of 356,18 sq. ft. and balcony area of 69.84 sq. ft.

The draw of the said project was held wherein the complainant was allotted unit no.

H-19 at tower H. c) That the buyer's agreement was executed between the partics on 31,.L2.2018.

The total sale consideration of the unit was 11s.14,59,6401 along with other taxes and charges payable.

The complainant paid Rs.13,80,371,/- against demand of Rs.13,80,37U - titt the date of filing of' case before the Authority as and when the demand were raised by thc respondent in time bound manner. d) That the respondent is hereby threatening and pressurizing thc complainant that he has to make the payment as per the affordable housing policy without even raising the demand letters by thc respondent side as per the agreed terms of BBA, without considering the amendment with regard to the time linked plan substitutcd to construction linked plan amended in the said policy from nronth November 2021 onward, in other word the respondent is trying to C.

9.

HARERA Complaint No.

2038, 1 301, 1302, 2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of202a GUl?UGRAM pressurise the complainant align the complainant in cancellation pool not even caring the hard fact that as per the BBA terms the project is already delayed by more than 3 year from the date of promise. e) That the cause of action to file the instant complaint has occurred within the jurisdiction of this Authority as the unit which is the subject matter of this complaint is situated in Sector 634, Gurugram, which is within thc jurisdiction of this Authority.

Relief sought by the complainant The complainant has sought the following relief[s): L Direct the respondent to pay interest @ 8. erest @ 8.650/o per annum as pcr thc prevailing MCLR plus2o/o on the paid amount of Rs.13,80,3711- lor delay period starting from 15.03,2021 till the actual handover of physical possession or offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining OC, whichever is earlier, as per the provisions of the Act.

IL Direct the respondent to handover possession of the unit after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority.

III.

Direct the respondent to raise last demand as per Affordable Ilousing Policy towards consideration of the said unit in order to make payment.

IV.

Direct the respondent to provide bank account of the complainant rn which last demand must be deposited as such the escrow account is being freezed by the Authority vide its order dated 12.OZ.ZOZ4.

V.

Direct the respondent to get the copy of OC as such the responclent claints that they have applied for OC.

VL Direct the respondent to change the address of the complainant to that mentioned in the memo of parties as despite reminders the respondent has not changed the previous address.

On the date of hearing, the authority explained to the respondent/ pronroter about the contraventions as alleged to have been committed in relation to Section 11(4) (a) of the act to plead guilry or not to plead guilry.

Reply by the respondent The respondent has contested the complaint on the following grounds, a) That the complainant applied to the respondent for allotment of thc unit vide an application form was allotted a unit bearing no. fl-1 9 in tower Il, having carpet area of 356.1-B sq. ft. and balcony area of 69.84 sq. f't. viclc l'jage 9 t-t|' 27 ,/ ./ 10.

D.

1.1.. ffi ffi HARERA GUl?UGRAM allotment letter dated 31.72.20L6.

The complainant represented to the respondent that they should remit every instalment on time as per the payment plan. ment plan.

The respondent had no reason to suspect the Uonafide of the complainant and proceeded to allot the unit in question in thcir favor, b) Thereafter, a builder buyer agreement was executed between thc partics on31,.12.20L8.

The agreement was consciously and voluntarily executed between the parties and terms and conditions of the same are binding on the parties. c) That as per clause 4.1 of the agreement, the due date of possession was subject to the allottee having complied with all the terms and condrtions of the agreement.

That being a contractual relationship, reciprocal promises are bound to be maintained.

The rights and obligations of the allottee as well as the builder are completely and entirely cletcrnrincd by the covenants incorporated in the agreement which continue to bc binding upon the parties thereto with full force and effect. d) That, as per clause 4.1, of the agreement, the respondent cndeavored to offer possession within a period of 4 years from the date of obtainmcr-rt of all government sanctions and permissions including environment clearance, whichever is later.

The possession clause of the agrccnrcnt is on par with clause 1(iv) of the Affordable Housing Policy, 201,3. e) That the building plan of the project was approved on 10.03.2015 fronr DGTCP and the environment clearance was received on 16.09.2016.

Thus, the proposed due date of possession, as calculated from the datc ol' EC, comes out to be 21.08.2021.

The Ld.

Authority vide notification no.9 /3-2020 dated26.05.2020 had allowed an extension of 6 months for the completion of the project the due of which expired on or aftcr 25.03.2020, on account of unprecedented conditions due to outbrcak of Page L0 ot'27 , Complaint No.

2038, 1 301, 1 302,2040, 2043, 2050, 20Bq and 2255 of 2024 HARERA ffi GUI?UGI?AM Covid-19.

Hence, the proposed due date of possession comes out to bc 16.03.2021.

6.03.2021.

0 That the offer of possession was also subject to the incidence of forcc majeure circumstances under clause 16 of the agreement. l'hc construction and development of the project was affected by circumstances which are beyond the control of the respondent. l'he respondent faced certain other force majeure events including but not limited to non-availability of raw material due to various orders of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court and National Grcen 'l'riburral thereby regulating the mining activities, brick kilns, regulation of the construction and development activities by the judicial authorities in NCR on account of the environmental conditions, restrictions on usage ol' water, etc.

These orders in fact inter-alia continued rill the year 2018.

Similar orders staying the mining operations were also passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and the National Grcen Tribunal in Punjab and Uttar Pradesh as well.

The stopping of mining activity not only made procurement of material difficult but also raiscd the prices of sand/gravel exponentially.

It was almost f or 2 years that the scarcity as detailed aforesaid continued, despite which, all efforts were made, and materials were procured at 3-4 times the ratc and thc construction of the Project continued without shifting any extra burdcn to the customer.

It is to be noted that the development and implementation of the said project have been hindered on account of several orders/directions passed by various authori ti es/fo ru rn s /co u rts.

Additionally, even before normalcy could resume, the world was hit by the Covid-19 pandemic.

The covid-19 pandemic resulted in scrious Page 17 of27 !

Complaint No.2038, 1301, 1302,204 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of 2024 ./ ffiHARERA ffi ouRUGRAM Complaint No.2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 challenges to the project with no available laborers, contractors etc, for the construction. struction. g) That as per license condition, developer are required to completc thcsc projects within a span of 4 years from the date of issuance of environmental clearance since they fall in the category of special timc bound project under Section 7B of the Haryana Developnrent and Regulation of Urban Area Act 1,975, for a normal Group tlousing Project there is no such condition applied hence it is required that 4. years prescribed period for completion of construction of Project shall bc hindrance free and if any prohibitory order is passed by cornpetent authority like National Green Tribunal or Hon'ble Supreme (lourt thcn the same period shall be excluded from the 4 years period or moratorium shall be given in respect of that period also. h) That in a similar case where such orders were brought before the Lcl.

Authority was in Complaint No.

3890 of 2021 titled "shuchi Sr-rr ancl An r. vs.

M/s. venetian LDF Projects LLP" which was decided on 1,7.0s.202'2, wherein the Hon'ble Authority was pleased to allow the grace period and hence, the benefit of the above affected 166 days need to be rightly given to the respondent. i) That even the UPRERA Authority at Gautam Budh Nagar has providcd benefit of 116 days to the developer on account of various orders of NGT and Hon'ble Supreme Court directing ban on construction activities in Delhi and NC& 10 days for the period }L.L1,.zot B ro to.tr.2ort.,4 days for 26.70.20L9 to 30.L0.20L9, 5 days for the period 04.11.2019 ro 08.11.2019 and 102 days for the period 04J.2.2019 to 74.02.2020.

The Authority was also pleased to consider and provided benefit of 6 months to the developer on account of the effect of COVID also.

Page 12 ol-27- ffi ffi HARERA GUl?UGl?AM j) That the Hon'ble UP REAT at Lucknow while deciding appeal No.

541 of 2011 in the matter of Arun Chauhan Versus Gaur sons IJi- 'fech Infrastructure Pvt Ltd vide order dated 02.11,. ed 02.11,.2021 has also grantcd thc extension of 116 days to the promoter on account of delay in completion of construction on account of restriction/ban imposed by thc Environment Pollution [Prevention & Control) Authority as well viclc order of Hon'ble Supreme Court Dated 14.lt.20lg. k) That Karnataka RERA vide notification No.

K-RERA/Secy/0412019-20 and No.

RERA/SEC/CR-04/201,9-2}has also granted 9 months extensron in lieu of Covid-19 pandemic.

Moreover, this Ld.

Authority had in similar matters of the had allowed the benefit of covid grace period of 6 months in a no. of cases. l) Despite there being several defaulters in the project, the respondcnt had to infuse funds into the project and have diligently developed the project in question.

Despite the default caused, the respondent got sanctioned loan from SWAMIH fund of Rs.

44.30 Crores to complete the project and has already invested Rs.

35 Crores from the said loan amount towards the project.

The respondent has already received the FIRE NOC, t.lFl'NOC, the sanction letter for water connection and electrical inspectton rcporL. m) Thatthe respondenthas applied for occupation certificate on 0U,12 .202:1.

Once an application for grant of occupation certificate is submitted for approval in the office of the statutory authority concerned, rcspondent ceases to have any control over the same.

The grant of sanctiorr of Ihc occupation certificate is the prerogative of the concerned statutory authority over which the respondent cannot exercise any influencc.

Therefore, the time utilized by the statutory authority ro grant occupation certificate to the respondent is required to be excluded from Page13of27 Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302, 2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 HARERA W* GUI?UGI?AM computation of the time utilized for implementation and development of the project. e project. n) That the complainant has been allotted unit under the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013 which under clause 5(iii)[b), clearly stipulated thc payment of consideration of the unit in six equal installments. 'l'hc complainant is liable to make the payment of the installments as per thc government policy under which the unit is allotted.

At the time of' application, the complainant was aware of the duty to make timely payment of the installments.

Not only as per the Policy, but thc complainant was also under the obligation to make timely payment of installments as agreed as per the BBA. o) That the complainant has failed to make any payment of installment at "within 36 months from the due date of Allotment" along with partial payment towards previous instalments.

The complainant cannot rightly contend under the law that the alleged period of delay continued even after the non-payment and delay in making the payments. 'l'he non- payment by the complainant affected the construction of thc projcct and funds of the respondent.

That due to default of the complainant, thc respondent had to take loan to complete the project and is bearing thc interest on such amount.

The respondent reserves the right to claim damages before the appropriate forum. p) That it is the obligation of the complainant under the Affordable Ilousing Policy, 201.3 (as on the date of Allotment) and the Act to make timely payments for the unit.

In case of default by the complainant the unit is liable to be cancelled as per the terms of Affordable Housing Policy,2OT .1. ql That the respondent issued a final reminder letter dated 14.05.2024 requesting the complainant to pay the outstanding dues.

In contple.tc Pagel4ol'27 // Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of 2024 HARERA GUl?UGI?AM Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302,2040, 2043, 2050, ZjBq and 2255 of 2024 default, the complainant failed to make the payment in 15 days. n 15 days.'l'hus, the unit of the complainant is liable to be cancelled in terms of clause 5(iii)ti) of the policy and claus e 3.7 of the buyer's agreement. 'f he respondent on 21,.06.2024 through publication gave another 1-5 days to clear the outstanding dues and get the allotment reinstated. r) That this Hon'ble Authority has adjudicated similar issues of termination/cancellation and has upheld the same noting the default on part of the Complainant.

The respondent cancelled the unit of thc complainant with adequate notices.

Thus, the cancellation is valid. s) That the complainant has not only in breach of the buyer's agreemcnt but also in breach of the Affordable Housing Policy and the IltilLA Act, by failing to make the due payments for installments. 'fhe unit has bccn cancelled, and this complaint is bound be dismissed in favor of thc respondent. t) That without prejudice, assuming though not admitting, relief of delayed possession charges, if any, cannot be paid without adjustntent o1' outstanding instalment from due date of instalment along with interest @l5o/o p.a. u) That, moreover, without accepting the contents of the complaint in any manner whatsoever, and without prejudice to the rights of thc respondent, the unit of complainant can be retained only after payment of interest on delayed payments from the due date of instalment till thc date of realization of amount.

Further delayed interest if any must be calculated only on the amounts deposited by the complainant towards the sales consideration of the unit in question and not on any amount credited by the respondent, or any payment made by the complainant towards delayed payment charges or any taxes/statutory payments, etc.

I)agc 15 of'27 "/ ffi ffi {{{s u{i ffiHARERA ffieunUGRAM Complaint No, 2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 12.

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

Their authenticity is not in dispute. n dispute.

Hence, the complaint can bc decided on the basis of these undisputed documents and submission macle by the parties.

E. |urisdiction of the authority 13.

The authority observes that it has territorial as well as subject nrattcr jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons given below.

E.I Territorial iurisdiction 14.

As per notification no.

7/92/2077-7TCP doted 14,12,2077 issued by 1'own and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of Real Estate Rcgulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gurugram District for all purposes with offices situated in Gurugram.

In the present case, the project in question is situated within the planning area of Gurugram District. 'l'hercfore, this authority has a complete territorial jurisdiction to deal with the prescnt complaint.

E.II Subiect matter iurisdiction 15.Section 11[a)(a) of the Act, 201,6 provides that the promorer shall bc responsible to the allottee as per ag-reement for sale.

Section 1,1(4)(a) is reproduced as hereunder: Section 71.... p) fhe promoter shall- (a) be responsible for all obtigations, responsibilities and funcLions under the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulations made thereunder or to the allottees as per the agreement for sele, or to the association of allottees, as the case may be, till the conveyance of all the apartments, plots or buildings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common oreas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be; Section S4-Functions of the Authority: 3a(fl of the Act provides to ensure compliance of the obligotions cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents under this Act and the rules and regulations made thereunder, / I)agc 16 ol'27 HARERA GUl?UGRAM Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of2024 16. of2024 16.

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 ro be decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by the complainant ar a latcr stage.

F.

Findings on the obiections raised by the respondent.

F.I obiection regarding delay due to force maieure circumstances.

77.It is contended on behalf of respondent that due to various circumstances beyond its control, it could not speed up the construction of the project, resulting in delays such as various orders passed by NG'f and Ilon'blc Supreme Court.

All the pleas advanced in this regard are devoid of merit. l'he passing of various orders to control pollution in the NCR-region during thc month of November is an annual feature and the respondent should have taken the same into consideration before fixing the due date.

Similarly, thc various orders passed by other Authorities cannot be taken as an excuse for delay as it is a well-settled principle that a person cannot take benefit of his own wrong.

18.

It is observed that the respondent was liable to complete the construction of the project, and the possession of the said unit was to be handed over by 1,6.09.2020 and is claiming benefit of lockdown amid covid-19.

In vicw ol' notification no.

9/3-2020 dated 26.05.2020, the Authority has allowed six months' relaxation due to covid-19 and thus with same relaxation, even if due date for this project is considered as 16.09.2020 + 6 months, possession was to be handed over by 16.03.2021, but the respondent has failed to handover possession even within this extended period.

G.

Findings on the relief sought by the complainant G.l Direct the respondent to pay interest @ 8.650/o per annum as pcr the prevailing MCLR plus 27o on the paid amount of Rs.13,80,37"1,/- for Page 17 of27 / ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRntr,t delay period starting from 15.03. rom 15.03.2021 till the actual handover of physical possession or offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining OC, whichever is earlier, as per the provisions of the Act of 2016.

19.

The factual matrix of the case reveals that the complainant booked a unit in the affordable group housing colony project of the respondent known as "63 Golf Drive" situated at sector 63-A, Gurugram, Haryana and was allotted unit no.

19, in tower H for a sale consideration of Rs.14,59,640/-.1.'urther, the complainant is always ready and willing to retain the allotted unit in question and has paid a sum of Rs.13,80,371/- towards the allotted unit.

20.

During the course of proceedings dated 02.04.2025, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the complainants have instituted proceedings before the Hon'ble National Company Law Tribunal (NCLI') in Casc No.

49 of }Ozs,seeking a refund along with interest at the rate of 240/oper annum.

It was further submitted that in the said NCLT proceedings, the date of default has been stated as 31.03.2023, whereas in the present complaint[s) beforc this Authority, the complainants have asserted the due date as 16.03.2021 and have sought relief in the form of delayed possession charges and delivery of possession.

In response, learned counsel for the complainants submittcd that the matter before the Hon'ble NCLT is at the admission stage and that no order has been passed therein as ofyet.

21.

Upon considering the submissions made by both parties, it is observcd that the matter before the NCLT is currently at the stage of admission and no order has been passed as on date.

Therefore, at this juncture, there cxists no bar under law that prevents this Authority from proceeding to adjudicate the present complaint[s) on merits.

22.ltis pertinent to note that a final reminder letter dated 14.05.2024 was being sent to the complainant-allottee, thereby affording her an opportunity to Page 18 of27 / Complaint No. plaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302 ,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 ffi ffi {ids w{i HARERA GUl?UGl?AM clear the outstanding dues.

Subsequently, upon failure to remit the said dues, the respondent published a notice in the newspaper "AA] SAMAI" on 21.06.2024, granting,a further period of L 5 days to the complarnant-allottees to comply with the payment obligations in accordance with the provisions of the Affordable Group Housing Policy, 201.3.

The said publication also stated that failure to make payment within the stipulated periocl would lead to automatic cancellation of the allotment, without any further notice or communication by the respondent.

23.

The foremost question which arises before the authority for the purpose o[ adjudication is that "whether the said publication would tantamount to a valid cancellation in the eyes of law or not?" 24.TheAuthority notes that the complainant has paid approximately 910/oof the sale consideration, and the respondent was required to hand over the project by 16.09.2020 under the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013, excluding rhe COVID-19 grace period.

Even with a six-month grace period in lieu of Covid- 19 pandemic to 1,6.03.2021, the respondent failed to complete the projecr.

More than three years later, the project remained incomplete, and thc respondent has obtained the occupation certificate from the competent authority on 31.1,2.2024.

The interest accrued during the delay period significantly reduces the amount payable by the complainant.

Upon adjustment of this interest, the respondent would, in fact be liable to pay the complainant.

Despite this, the respondent chose to cancel the unit on grounds of non-payment, while neglecting its own obligations.

Such actions by the respondent displays bad faith, as it failed to adjust the delay period interest.

25.

Additionally, as per Clause 9.2 of the Agreement for Sale, annexecl as Annexure A to the Rules, 2017, the allottee has the right to stop making Page 19 ol'27 complaint No. plaint No.2038, 1301, 1302 ,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRnrr,t further payments if the promoter defaults on its obligations.

The relevant portion is reproduced below: 9.2 In case of Default by Promoter under the conditions listed above, Allottee is entitled to the following: (i0 Stop making further payments to promoter as demanded by the Promoter.

If the Allottee stops makinpl payments, the Promoter shall correct the situation by completing the construction/ development milestones and only thereafter the Allottee be required to make the next payment without any interest for the period of such delay; or...

26.|n the present case, the promoter was obligated to complete the construction within four years from the date of either the environment clearance or the building plan approval, whichever was later, i.e., by 1,6.09.2020. uowevcr, the promoter failed to complete the project within this timeline. liven aftcr granting a six-month extension due to the Covid-19 pandemic, extending the deadline to 16.03.2021, the promoter did not complete the construction.

Thus, in accordance with Clause 9.2, the allottee was fully justified rn stopping further payments.

Therefore, considering the above findings, the cancellation of the allotment is deemed invalid and is hereby quashed as issued in bad faith.

Thus, the respondent is directed to reinstate the unit allotted to the complainant.

27.Herein, the complainant intends to continue with the project and is sceking delay possession charges at a prescribed rate of interest on the amount already paid by him as provided under the proviso to Section 1U[1) of thc Act, which reads as under:- "Section 78: - Return of amount and compensation 18(1).

If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot, or building, - Provided that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the praject, he shall be paid, by the promoter, interestfor every month of delay, till the handing he handing over of the possession, ot such rate as may be prescribed." Page 2O of 27 / Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 HARERA W"GUl?UGtlAM 28.

Due date of handing over possession: The project was to be developed under the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013, which clearly mandates that thc project must be delivered within 4 years from the date of commenccnrcnt of project (as per clause 1(iv) of Affordable Housing Policy,2013, all such projects shall be required to be necessarily completed within 4 ycars fronr the approval of building plans or grant of environmental clearancc, whichever is later.

This date shall be referred to as the "date of commencement of project" for the purpose of this policy) However, the respondent has chosen to disregard the policy provision.

Clause 1[iv) of thc Affordable Housing Policy, 2013 is ieproduced as under: "7(iv) All such projects shall be required to be necessarily completecl within 4 years from the approval of building plans or grant of environmental cleorance, whichever is lqter.

7'his daLe shall be referred to as the "date of commencement of project" for the purpose of this policy.

The licences shall not be renewed beyond the sqid 4 years period from the date of commencement of project." 29. the present case, the date of approval of building plans is 10.0.1.201 5, ancl the date of environment clearance is 16.09.2016.

The due date of handing over of possession is reckoned from the date of environment clearance being later.

Therefore, the due date of handing over of possession contes out to be 1,6.09.2020.

Further as per HARERA notification no.

9/s-2020 dated 26,05.2020, an extension of 6 months is granted for the projects having a completion date on or after 25.03.2020, The completion date of thc aforesaicl project in which the subject unit is being allotted to the complainant is 1.6.09.2020 i.e., after 25.03.2020.

5.03.2020.

Therefore, an extension of 6 months is to be given over and above the due date of handing over possession in view of notification no.

9/3-2020 dated 26.05.2020, on account of forcc nrajcurc conditions due to the outbreak of Covid-19.

As such the due date for handing over of possession comes out to be 1,6.03.2021.

Pag,e 27 of 27 ./ Complaint No.

2038, 1 301, 1 302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 ffiHARERA ffi ouRUGRAM 2043, zoso, zole ^n9 32s!:f 2!30 __) 30.

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

Proviso to Section 1B provides that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be paid, by the 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, ibid.

Rule 15 has been reproduced as under: "Rule 75.

Prescribed rate ofinterest- [Proviso to section 72, section 78 and sub-section (4) and subsection (7) of section 191 (1) For the purpose of proviso to section L2; section 1-B; and sub- sections (4) and (7) of section 19, the "interest at the rate prescribed" shall be the State Bank of India highest marginal cost of lending rate +20/0.: Pravided that in case the State Bank of India marginal cost of lending rate (MCLR) is not in use, it shall be replaced by such benchmark lending rates which the State Bank of lndia may fix from time to time for lending to the generol public." 31.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the provision of Rule 15 of the Rules, ibid, has determined the prescribed rate o[ interest.

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

32.

Consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i.e.

India i.e., https : f f sbi.co.in, the marginal cost of lending rate (in short, MCLR) as on date i.e., 07 .05.20'25 is 9.10%.

Accordingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost oI lending rate +20/o i.e., 11.1"00/0.

33.

The definition of term 'interest' as defined under Section Z(za) of the Act provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the allottee by thc promoter, in case of default, shall be equal to the rate of interest which thc promoter shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case of default. l'he relevant section is reproduced below: Page22 ol27 ,,/.

HARERA ffi GU|IUGRAM "(za) "interest" means the rates of interest payable by the promoter or the allottee, as the case may be.

Explanation. -For the purpose of this clause- @ fhe 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. (ii) the interest payable by the promoter to the allottee sholl be from the date the promoter received the amount or any part thereof till the date the amount or port thereof and interest thereon is refunded, and the interest payable by the allottee to the promoter shall be from the date the allottee defaults in payment to the promoter till the date it is paid;" 34.

Therefore, interest on the delay payments from the complatnant shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 11,.10 o/o by the respondent which is thc same as is being granted to them in case of delayed possession chargcs.

35.

On consideration of the documents available on record and subntissions made regarding contravention of provisions of the Act, the Authority is satisfied that the respondent is in contravention of the Section 11[4)[a) of the Act by not handing over possession by the due date as per the agreemcnt.

36. emcnt.

36.

It is the failure of the promoter to fulfil its obligations and responsibilities as per the buyer's agreement to hand over the possession within ghe stipulated period.

Accordingly, the non-compliance of the mandate contained in Scction 11(4)(a) read with Section 1B[1) of the Act on the part of the respondcnt is established.

As such the complainant is entitled to delay possession chargcs at the prescribed rate of interest i.e., @ 11.\0o/o p.a. w.e.f.

16.03.2021 till thc offer of possession plus 2 months or actual handing over of possession whichever is earlier as per provisions of Section 1B[1) of the Act rcad with Rule 15 of the Rules, ibid.

G.II Direct the respondent to handover possession of the unit after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority.

37. the present complaint, the grievance of the complainant is that thc physical possession has not been handed over by the respondent to the' I)agc 23 nrr, , Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 HARTRA Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and 2255 of 2024 GURUGI?AM complainants.The authority observes that the respondent-promoter has obtained occupation certificate of the said project from the competcnt authority on3L.1.2.2024.

Further, Section 17(1,) of the Act of 2076 obligatcs the respondent-promoter to handover the physical possession of the subjcct unit to the complainant complete in all respect as per specifications mentioned in BBA and thereafter, the complainant-allottee is obligated to take the possession within 2 months as per provisions of Section 19[10) ol' the Act, 201,6.

38.

In view of the above, the respondent is directed to handover the possessior-r of allotted unit to the complainant complete in all respect as pcr specifications of buyer's agreement within a period of one month from datc of this order after payment of outstanding dues, if any, as the occupation certificate for the project has already been obtained by it f ed by it from thc competent authority.

G.III Direct the respondent to raise last demand as per Affordable Housing Policy towards consideration of the said unit in order to make payment.

G.lV Direct the respondent to provide bank account of the complainant in which last demand must be deposited as such the escrow account is being freezed by the Authority.

39.

The Authority, vide its order dated 29.04.2024, had already directed the dc- freezing of the respondent's bank accounts to a limited extent, thcrcby permitting the receipt of incoming funds and authorizing the respondenL to withdraw amounts from the escrow account for the specific purposc of' discharging statutory liabilities, including renewal of license, furnishing of bank guarantees, and payment of fees to RERA/DTCP.

Accordingly, thc complainant is directed to deposit the amount raised in the last demand by Page 24 ol 27 HARERA ffiGURUGRAM the respondent, if any outstanding dues remain after adjusting the antount towards delayed possession charges.

G.V Direct the respondent to get the copy of OC as such the respondent clai ms that they have applied for OC.

40.

As per the additional documents placed on record by respondent on 03.04.2025, the Authority finds that the respondent has obtained the occupation certificate for the said project on 31 .1,2.2024.

41.

As per Section 11[a)[b) of Act of 2016, the respondent is under an obligation to supply a copy of the occupation certificate/completion certificatc or both to the complainant-allottee.

The relevant part of section 11 of the Act of 2016 is reproduced as hereunder: - "17(4).... @) fhe promoter shall be responsible to obtain the completion certiftcate or the occupancy certificate, or both, as applicable, from the relevant competent authority os per local laws or other laws for the time being in force and to make it available to the allottees individually or to the association of allottees, as the case may be." 42. y be." 42.Even otherwise, it being a public document, the allottee can have acccss to the it from the website of DTCP, Haryana.

G.VI Direct the respondent to change the address of the complainant to that mentioned in the memo of parties as despite reminders the respondent has not changed the previous address.

43.

The above said relief was not pressed by the complainant counsel during thc arguments in the course of hearing.

Also, the complainant failed to proviclc or describe any information related to the above-mentioned relief sought.

The authority is of the view that the complainant counsel does not intend to pursue the relief sought by the complainant.

Hence, the authority has t-rc-rt returned any findings with regard to the above-mentioned relief.

H.

Directions of the authority Page25 ofzly' Complaint No.

2038, 1 301, 1302, 2040, 2043, 2050, 20Bq and 2255 of 2024 ffiHARERA ffi GURTJGRAM 44.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under Section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function entrusted to the authority under Section 3a[f): I.

The respondent is directed to pay delay possession charges to the complainant against the paid-up amount at the prescribed rate of interest i.e.,11.10o/o p.a. for every month of delay from the due date of posscssion 1,6.03.2021 till offer of possession plus 2 months or actual handing over of possession whichever is earlier, as per proviso to Section 1B(1) of the Act read with Rule 15 of the Rules, ibid.

II.

The arrears of interest accrued so far shallbe paid to the complainant within 90 days from the date of this order and interest for every month of delay shall be paid by the promoter to the allottee before 1Oth of the subsequent month as per Rule 1,6(2) of the Rules, ibid.

The complainant shall deposit the last demand raised by the respondent, iI any outstanding remains after adjustment of the delayed possession charges.

IV. arges.

The rate of interest chargeable from the allottee by the promoter, in case of default shall be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 11,.1.0o/o by thc respondent/promoter which is the same rate of interest which the prornote r shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case of default i.e., the delayed possessron charges as per Section Z(za) of the Act.

The respondent is directed to issue a revised statement of account after adjustment of delayed possession charges, and other reliefs as per above within a period of 30 days from the date of this order.

The complainants arc directed to pay outstanding dues if any remains, after adjustment of delay possession charges within a period of next 30 days.

Pag,e 26 of'27 1/ Complaint No.

2038, 1301, 1302,2040, 2043, 2050, 2089 and 2255 of 2024 ffiHARERA ffiGURUGtlntrl Complaint No,2038, 1301, i 302,2040, 2043,2050,2089 and2255 of 2024 VI.

The respondent is directed to handover the possession of the allotted unit to the complainant complete in all aspects as per specifications of buyer's agreement within one month from date of this order, as the occupation certificate in respect of the project has already been obtained by it from thc competent authority.

VII.

The respondent shall not charge anything from the complainant which is not part of the buyer's agreement and the provisions of the Affordable Ilousing Policy,2013.

46.

The complaints stand placed in the case fil 47.

Files be consigned Dated: 07.05.2025 45.

This decision shall mutatis mutandis apply to cases mentioned in para 3 of this order. rtified copy of this order shall be ok M Haryana I Estate Regulato uthorify, Page27 of27 Gurugram