NEELAM YADAV vs OCEAN SEVEN BUILDTECH PVT. LTD.

* cb A ,Lr EI] rQ Ir H G BI I \[1 .H Rt ?A :T )R E IE G RI B IU ol ComplaintNo.4S5of 2023and HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM 20.o5,202s_l TIIT: BIJILDDR Ocean Sev€n Buildtech Pvt l"td.

ECT NAME Exprr\\way I owers sector'l09 Guruerrm Haryrn' Deepti CuPia v/s ocean Seven B! ildt€ch P rivate Linited LiyaktAli ocean seven BuiLdtech P.ivate Limited vinaYxumarshrfna Ocean Seven Buildtech Pnvare Llmired cR/48s/2021 LIl,l* l540l2a2i r+R/b00/2023 tr I ce.lazslzozz 6 tR/626120?3 CORAM: ShriViiay Xumar Goyal Shri Ashok Sangwan APPEARANCE: Shri Harshit Batra, Advocate shri Arun Kumar, Advocate Chairman dispose of all comPlalnant(s) ResPondent ORDER the 6 complajnts titled above filed beibre this the Rcal Estate IRegulation and DevelopmeDo Pag' 1of29 Complarnt No.485 o12023 and SHARERA 'omoun No 4'co,,o/\dro S-eLnuennv I 'dh"rs Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred as the Acf') read with rule 28 oithe Haryana RealEstate IRegulation and Development] Rules,2017 [hereinafter referred as '1he rules"l rbr violation of section 11(4)(al oi the Act wherein lt is i.ter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all its obl,gatrons, responsibilities and iunctions to the allottees as per the agreement for sale executed inter se parties.

The core issues emanating from them are similar in nature and the complainant(, r. the above referr€d matters are allottees oi the project, namely, "Expressway TowerJ', Sector_ 109, Gurugram, Haryana being dcveloped by the respondent/promoteri e., M/s Ocean Seven Buildtech Private Lrmited.

The terms and conditions of the allotment letter, buyer's agreements, fulcrum of the issue involved in allthese cases pertains to iailure on the part of the promoter to deliver timely possession of the units in question seeking award of possession and delayed possession charges and execute the conveyance deed and others.

The details olthe complaints, unitno. s, unitno., date olageement, possession clause, due date ofpossession, totalsals consideratioD, totalpaid amount, and reliefsought are given in the table below: 2.

Proje(tName.nd Lo.rtiotr ^'dtsecror l0c.

Curug Jm Ariurdable Sroup hous'nBcoLony Etta"- DTCP licen.e no. and other BuildinEplan approvaldalcd 06 of2016 dated 16.06.2016 Licensee.

Sh. sh.ee Bhagwan 26.09.20t6 (As info.mationobtain.d f.om the planningb..n As inr.rmationobtaired from the RERA Registered/ 301 0f 2017dated 13.10.2017 THARERA !s'GuRUGRAI,I ConplaintNo.4S5of 2023and VaLrd upio l2l0 2021 tunen3 node us Det Povnent Plon ' lhe Canpony sholl encerety endeovor to complete the constuction and olfer the possession olthe sakt unit within live lears t om the dotc ol the re.eiins ol ticense ('conmitmeat Perio.t"), but subJe.t to lot* najeuft clouse of tht Aqree ent on.l timety polneat ol insrollments br the Aiottee(sJ flowever n Lnse dre Canpony.anptetes the.anst.uctu t Ptior ta the penotl olSteors the Allottee sholl not roise anl objecrion in takiag the possession orq poqent ol rematning sole pnce ond other cnaryes stipuloted in the Agreement to sell The conpany oh obtainnq ettif.atc ht dcupodon and use b! the conpeteht A1tho ties sholl hondovet the said unit ta the Allaxec la. hi\/hd/their aaupodon anl use, sLb)ect ta ttP Alattee horing .onpliel irh oll the tems o,l nt)diorsalLh. sorl PaliLy atld Agrcetnent bSellan.l I: 2 ''tlate ol amhencenent of ptoied" for the purPose al Atl :uch pratects shall be rcqritcd to be n..esan! conpleted ||ithn a Jeo$ lrom the opprovol ol buildin! plans or groLt ol envnonnentol clearonrc. ||hi.hevet B loter.

Thistlote shutt he rcfe.red ta us thc thx pahcy.

The licenses shollnot be renewed bevond ttt. sad 4 leors peiod lon the dote ol conne .encnt ol ARERq URUGRA[/ ComplaintNo.4S5of 2023and t complaint No- 485 of2023 and t. *HARERA S-aJRuGRAu The facts of a)1 the complaints filed by $e comPlain?nt(s) /alloftee(s) are similar. e similar.

Out of the above-mentioned case, the particulars of lead case CU4a5/2023 ritled as Deepti Gupu vs. ll/s Oceon Sarcn Rulldtecrr Pl't Id are being taken into consideration lor determining the nghts of th€ allottee(s).

Prolect and unit related details The particulars ofthe project,the details ofsale consideration, the amountpaid by the complainant, date ofproposed handing over the possession, delay period, ifany, have been detailed in the following tabular form: Pag€ 5 of29 HARERA GURUGRAl\/ 485/2023 titl Complaint No.485 of2023 and ed as Deepti Gupta Vs.

M/s Ocean Seven Buildtech PvL Ltd. the approvol oI building p I environment4l cleorone, whlchever is late..

This ddte sholl be rclerred to os the ''dote ol can enenent of ptuject" lor the pu.pose ol this policy- The liceTes sholl not be renewed beyond the said 4 yearc petiod Jrom the date a f co n n ence ment of proiect S No, Name and location of the 'Expressway Towers" at sector-1o9, 2 Affordable sroup housing l 6 012016 dated 05.09.2019 valid up to 04.09.2024 5 RERA Registered/ nor Registered vide !o.

301 o12017 dared 13.10.2017 valid up to 12.70.2021 105.1nfloor & Tower-4 rAs Der Dase no,24ofthe comDlaintl Unrr area ad measu nnB 644 sq. ft. (Carpetarea) 100 sq. to [balconyarea] (Paee no.2l ofthe coml,l44l , 20.05.2017 lAi ner b,se no.17 ofthecomDlaint Date ofagreement to sell 31.05.2017 fAs Der gaEe no.

19 ofthe conPlaintl 10 'Ihe compohy shall sincerely en.leovor to complere the construcllon and oJler the possession ol the soid unit wlthin lve yed$ l.on he dok oJ the receivins ol ticense (conmltment Pe.tod), but stbiect to lorce nojeure ctduse olthis agreement on.l timely poyment ol lnstollments by the l4s aglrlsgrlo, SlrI!!9:9,11-p!!t!!L 1(tv) ol the AJIorltobte oustng Poticy, 2013 All such prcjects sholl be rcqulrcd to be neessa.ily complete.l vr'ithin 4 yeors Irom th. nhnraval dihtildino Dlons or oront ol 1I Postessron clruse as Per Aftordable Hou$ns PolicY, 27 ComplaintNo. mplaintNo.4SSof 2023and HARERA GUl?UGRA[/ Duc drre ofpossesson 1A 04 2022 25.03.2420 Rs.26,26,000/- [calcDlated from the date ol environment dearance dated 30.11.20u being later + 5 moDths as per HARE RA notincation no.

9/ 3- 2o2o dated 26.05.2020 for the projects havinE completion date on or after tl Rs.27 ,74,626/. (As alleged by the complainant on page Do. tn B.

Facts ofthe complaint 6.

The complainant has made th€ following submissions in the complaint: I That relying on the representatioDs, warranti€s, and assurances of the respondent about the timely dellvery ol ppssession, the complainant booked an apartment in the real estate development of th€ respondent, known under the name and style of 'tjxpressway Towers'at Sector 109, Gurugrim, under the Affordable Housing Policy,2013.

That since the booking ofthe un,toathecomplainant tilldate, the complainan(, had been continLroudy harassed by the defaulting conduct ofthe respondent, which shallbe noted as urder.

IL That the complainant was allotted an apartment b€aring no.

105, 1i floor, in lower 4 having 644 sq. ft. carpet area and 100 sq. ft. balcony area in project oi respondent named "Expressway Towers" at Sector 109, Gurugram, under the Aftordable Housitrg Po1icy,2013 vide allotment letter dated 20.05.2017.

Tbereafter, sn, burlder buye. agreement was executed between the parties on 31.05.2017.

T.t:l s:le..nriderati.n O((uparon ceftLi,car€ 1,2 Complaint No.485 of2023 and HARERA u III IV GURUGRAIV That after the allotmeDt ofthe unit, a builder buye. agreement was given to bc executed.

Thatthe complainant was made to sign the one_sided arbitrary agreementthe terms and conditions ofwhich were fixed and could noi have been altered That the respondent had devlated lrom the te.ms and conditions olthe Affordable Housing policy, under the sa,d Agreement and had malafidely attempted to force its own terms and conditions over the Complainant. mplainant.

For instance, the due date olpossession has been n]alatidely extended over and above the timelines mentioned in the Afiordable Housing Po1icy,2013.In case of delay in payment, 15% ofinterest is chargcd f.om ihe complainant under clause4.5 however, no payment oainterest has been noted in case ot delay bl, the respondent.

Ihe respondent takes a$'av the.ight forraisingobiectionsincaseolalterationin layoutplan a.d design under clause 4.8 of the aereement.

Labour cess, VAT and WTC have been noted under clause4.9(iii), however, the samecannot be legallv charged.

Thai succumbing to the one'sided and arbitrary coDdud ofthe respondent, the complainant, who book€d the unit with dreams and aspiration ol owning his own house, executed thearbitrary agreement.

Atthe outset, il rs reiterated that the respondent had unilaterally, unlawiully and arbitrarily extend.d the d ue date under th e agreement by going beyond the Affo rdab le Housing Policy,2013, lvhich, under no circumstance whatsoever, can be That under the Sec 1[iv] ol the Affordable llousrng Policy, 2013 the possession olthe unit was to be delivered within 4 years lrom the approval ol building plan or grant of environnlental clearance, whichever is later.

Ilence, the due date needs to be computed from the Affordabl€ Housing Policy,2013.

Cohplaint No,,{85 of 2023 and HARERA GURUGRAI\,4 Thattilldate, the possession has notbeen ofered and the proiectis far irom being completed. lt is a matter of record that no occupancy certificate has been applied till date and the essential services are incomplete in the project.

Ihe entirc aim of .reanng ariordable living has been miserably violated by the respondent, due to its inordinate delay 'lhat the respondent failed in complying with all the obligations, not only with respect to the agreemcnt with the complainant but also with respect to the concerned laws, rules, and reSul.ttions thereunder, due to which the co m plainant faced innumerable hardships. hardships.

M oreover, the respondent made ialse statements aboutthe progress ofthe proiectas and when inquired by ihe complajnant.

That thereafter, the malande conduct and unlawlul activiti.s of the respondent continued which has consequently led the complainanttogothrough mentalagonyandfinancialdistress.ltisfurther submjtted that taking advantage of the domlnant pos,t,on and malafide intention had restored to unlair trade practices by harassing the complainant by way ofdelaying the Project by diversion olthe monev fronr the innocent and gullible buYer.

That in case of delay in the offer oipossessio[ the complainant has a right under proviso of section 18 ofthe Act to seek delay possession charges lill the actual handover of possession That accordingly, the respondent is bound to make the payment of interest on the amount deposited by the complainant till the actual handover of possession.

That the complain.nt has a statutory risht undcr section 18 ol the Act, which, cannot go unnoticed.

Henc., for the delay caused in offering the possession, the respondent is liable to pay the complainant the delay possession charges under section 18(11 of the Act r/w rule 15 of, Haryana RERA Rules and section 11(41 of the Act, lrom the due date ofpossession 1.e.,26 09.2020 till VI vtl VIII Complaint No.485 of2023 and HARERA GURUGRAIV actual handover of physical possession certificate, after the receipt ot occupancy That it is the failure ol the promoter to fulfil his obligations, and responsibilitiesaslo hand over the possession within the stiPulated period Accordingly, the non compliance ofthe mandate contained insection 11 [4] (a) read with sectioD 18(1) of the Act on the part of the respondent is established.As such thecomplajnantisent,tled to delayed possessionatthe prescribed rate oi rntcrest trom the due date till the physical handover of possession as per provisions oisectlon 18[1] olthe Act That the respondent has utterly tailed to lulnl its obligation to deliver the posse the possession oithe apartment in time and adhere to the contentions of e aSreementwhich has caused menralagony, harassment, and huge losses to the complainan! hence the prese nt complaint.

That as per the Affordable Housing Policy,2D13 fread with amendment dated 04.01.2021 vide Memo No.

PF'27(voL'lll)/2020/z'TcP/47) the parking space is to be provided at the rate ofbalfequivalent car space (ECSI lor every unit, and it is unclear as to what amount of parking charge has been levied.

Looking at the utter malafide activities olthe respondent, the complainant seeks clear bifurcation of the total sale price, including the charse ol parkinS.

That in the circumstance, it is seen that an excessive charge is being demanded by the respondent, this Authority may kindly be pleased to direct the respondentto refund the same.

That moreover, as per the amended Affordable Housing Policy, additional car parking can be providcd/sold after deriviDg conse't oi 2/3" of rhe allottees.

That in complete violation of the same, the builder has been selling the car parkiDgat exorbitant rates and encroaching upon the common areas of thc project. 'lhat the builder should be restrained lrom carrying such Pase 10.129 IX XI, xtl HARERA GURUGRA[/ complaintNo,485of 2023and XTI I illeeal, malafde and unlarlful activities in violation of the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013.

That I is a settled position of law that in aifordable housing projects, the builder is bound to maintaiD the Project for a span oi5 yea.s f,rom the date of occupan.y certificate.

That the respondent, under the clause 4.9(iii) and Iiv] ofthe agreement hds i Work ContractTax: ; Power Backup charges That the respondent seeks to put the additional burden ofthese costs over xtv. xvl xvll. thccompl.rinantwherthesame is bound to be paid by the respondent only Accordingly, the respondent be restrained from raising any such demand irom rhe complainant.

That the conduct of the respondent has been nalorde since the verv beginning. beginning.

Despite having gravell, defauked in the construction ofthe unit, the material being used forconstruction is sub_par, excess monies are being collected from the allottees, the builder has been committing nisappropriation ofiunds, and stands in violation of the DTCP norms and the mandatory complia.ce under the Act o12016.

Further, in September 2 02 2 rh e I)TCP had also reco mnle nded the cancellation of the lice nse of the projects ofthe Respondent due to its continuous non compliance.

That thereaiter, vide another meeting oi the allottees, conducted on 04.11.2022, with the Chajrman, STP, Curugram, all ofthe said issues ilcre categorically highlighted.

The Chairman had also suggested tbe allottees to rp p roach H RE RA for red ressal of bilateral issues i e., iorensic financial audit etc.

Additionally, the Respondent was directed to not sell car parking over the common areas and was required to submit the approved site plan, showing the parking space.

XVI]I.

That in light of the above, in order to saf€guard the interests of the complainant and save thecomplainant from beingwrongfully prejudiced by the unlawful conduct ofthe respondent and in line with the suggestion of the Chairman, STP, it is most humbly requested that a local commissioner be appointed to carryon the followingtasks: > To ascertain the stage oi construction ol the Proiectj > To verili,lthe construction quality is sub'pari - To veflly the rilegdlcdr parking being sold by Lhe respondent: , To verify is rhe development is inhccordance w,th the srte plani XIX.

Additionally, a forensic audit ot the books of accounts be conducted to verify, *HARERA S- etnuenAur ComplaintNo.4S5 of 2023and ; The totalamount ofmonres collect€d by the allottees ofthe proiectl i.

The total amount ofmoniesyet to be collected from the allotteesj , The total amount of monies utilised towards the construction /development oithe project, z The expenditure yet to be incurred towards the constructir)n developnrent of the pr of the projectl , lf the fund from the allottees rs being maintajned in the escrow account / The records of the accountant v€rifying the disbu.sement of monies towards expenditure done for the construction/development of the project tilldate; ; Ascertain whether 70% oi the depos,t by the allottees was being depositcd in a separate bankaccount.

XX.

That the registration ofthe project has been expired since 12.10.2021 dnd the same has not been renewed till date.

That accordingly, the resPondent had conrmitted default of section 6 of the RERA Act and hence, Penal proceedings in this regard be initiated a8ainst the respondent l\4oreover, aiteran inordinate delay in the project, no specific date iorhandingover ot ihe possession has been undertaken by the.espondent and hence, the Complaint No.485 of2023 and *HARERA S-cLrnLrcmu respondent should be directed to provide on afiidavi! the date bywhen the valid and lesal offer of possession shallbe made by the respondent Reliefsought by the complalnanh ' The complainant has sought followi0g reliea[s]: t.

To restrain the respondent from terminating the unit till the final disposal of the present comPlaint.

II.

To appoint a local commiss,oner to carryout the tasks as mentioned in para 31 otthe complaint.

IIl.

To conduct a forensic audit ofthe book oiaccounts of lhe respondent as pertask mentioned in para 32 ofthecomplainl.

IV.

To dnect the respondent to provide on aflidavit, a date till which a valid offer of possession shall be gtven. 'lfthe respondent fails to provide the sarne, penal pro€eedings for violaiion of section 4(21(l)(c) be initiated dgrin(t Ihe respondenL V.

T; direct the respondentto provideavalid physical possession afterreceipt ol occupdnry certificdte.

V I To d i r e, I the respondent to give delayed posrfssion cha rger (a MCLR'2vo from 26 0c. rom 26 0c.2020 rillthe dare ol actual phy$ical bossession at the presrr,bed rate ol rntere(l; vll' To direct the respondentto give anti'proflteering credit/input tax credit to rhe compldrnani: VIll.

To direcithe respondenttoexe{utetheconv€yance deed after offeringvalid offer or possession to the complainanti lx.

To res;ain the respondent hom demanding Labour Cess, vAT, work Conkact Tax and Power Backup chaiSes;l X.

To direct the respondent to givebifurcatiSn ofthe total sale price including the clarification of cost of parking under rhe Afaordable Housing Policv, 2013: Xl.

To restrain the respondent irom charging any maintenance charges in future as the complainant is not bound topaythesameundertheAffordable Housing Policy,2013, xll.

To restiain th€ .espondent from demanding car parking charges from the complainanti x1ll.

To;ke action forviolation olsectioD 6, ie., non_extension ofregistration of XIV.

Crant any other relief as this Hon'ble Authority deems fir in the peculiar fa€ts and circumstances ofthe present complaint. c.

7.

Complarnt No.485 o12023 and SHARERq 'orDdn Ni 48ro o/rJ o *6* e-nienntl <o hP- 0n the date oi hearing, the suthority explained to the respondent/ promoter about the contraventions as alleged to have been comm,tt€d in relation to scction 11[4) {:]l ofthe act to plead guilry or not to plead suilty.

Reply by the respondent l he respondcntis contesting the complaint on the lollowing grounds: i That thjs Authority lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the present complaint as vide clause 16.2 ol the build€r buyer agreement both the pa.ties have unequivocally sgreed to resolve any disputes th.ou8h ri.

That the complainant is a willtul defaulter and deliberately, intentionally .nd knowingly have not pald timely instalments. iii. lhat starting iiom tebruaty 2023, the construction activities have been severely inrpacted due to thc suspqnsion oithe license and the lreezing of accounts bythe DTCP Chandigarh and HRERA Gurugram, respectivelv This suspens is suspension and tieezing of accounts .epresent a lorce maieure event beyond the control of the respondent The suspersion of the license and tieczing ofac€ounts, starting from Feb 2023 tilldate, have created a zero time scenario lor the resPondenl Further, there is no delav on the part ol the respondent project as it is covered under claus€ number 5 5 forcc Mateure, which is beyond control ofthc .espondent. iv.

Th:rt the linalEC is CTE/CTO which has been received bvthe respondent in February 2018.ltence the start daie ofproject is Feb 2018 and rest details 1t D, 9 Feh 22 covid aod NGT Restrictictions Proiectcompletion Date covid lock down waiver stay [3 months approx.lorevery l f Ncr 18 months yearli.e.6+3 PHARERA S-qrnLrnlv ComplaintNo,4S5of 20Z3and Tot,ll ime errended to be exlended (18+181months Eeb 2023 tilldate A..ouhts freeTed & li.ense $sDended furthertime to be extended tillthe unfreezingoithe accounts i.e.

Feb- Nov Final project completion date (in case project is unfteezed) further timewould be Nov-21 added till unireezing the accounts Nov-25 As per the table given above, th. final date lor the completion of construction is Feb 25 in case theaccounts are u nfreezed by the co mpetent authorityonthedateoifrlingthls reply.

From Feb2023,thelicensehasbeeD suspended and accounts have been freezed by the DTCP Chandigarh and IIRERA Curugram.

10.

Copies oiallthe .elevant documents have been fil€d and placed on the record.

Their ruthenticity is not in dispute. llence, the complaint can be decided on lhe basis ofthese undisp u ted docu ments and submission made by the parties.

E. lurisdiction ofthe Authority 11.

The Anthority observes that 1t has terrltorial as well as subject matter urLsdictron to adiudi.ate the pr€sent complaint for the reasons given below E.l Territorialiurisdictiotr 12. r\s per notiflcahon n o .

1/92/2017-1TCP dated 14r220r 7 issued by Town and Country Planning Department, thc jurisd,ction of R. tion of R.a1 Estate Regulatory rluthority, Curugram shall be entrre Curugran District lor all purpose with officcs situated in Gurugram.

In the present.ase, the project in question is ntuated (ithin the planning area ofGurugram District.

Therefore, this autho.ity has complete territo rial ju risdlctio n nr dealwith the present co mplaint.

E.ll subie.tmatt.r iurisdiction I flHARERA S-eunrnnAr'/ 13.

Section 11(4)(al orth€ to the allottee as per agreement for sale.

Section 11(axa) is reproduced as Section 17 iqtn" p,o."t",'tcrt' ' ' (a) ie rcsponsible far o obligotio^s respansibilnies ond fun'tions un'l{ ih, prcvRions afthis Act ar the rutd ond rcsulotiont ndlle thereunder o' h ;he atlottees os Der the osr4nent t'ar tute ot to the o$ocidtion al dllottees, os the co* ftot be, till the canvetance ofoll the oparment' plots or buildmss, os the cose not be to the olattees, or the cannon ote6 to the ossociotion oI allott@s ot the @nPetent outhoritv, as rhe cav dot bej Section 34-Fun.tiots ol the Authortq: 34(fl of the Act pravides to e8!re cokPhonce ol the obligotions @st upon th; Drcnoters, the allott$ ond the idl 6tote agents undel this act ond th. rules ond regulattons nade thAr.u"der' 14.

So, inviewofthe provisions of the Act quoted above, the authority has complete ju risdict,on to decide the complarnt regardi ng non compliance of obligations by the promoter leaving aside compensation which rs to be decided bY the [.

Findingso! obiections r.ised by the respondetrt r.r 5r;cction regarding complain.nt is in breach of agreement for non' invocation of arbitratlon.

15.

Thc respondent has submitted that the CohplaintNo,4S5of 2023and Acr 2016 provides that the promoter shall be responsible adiudicatinsofficerilpursued bythecomplainant complaint is not maintainable for ihe reason that the agreement contains dispute resolution mechanism to be 16. to be 16.

The authority is of the opiDion that the jurisdiction ofthe authority cannot be fett€red by the existence ofan arbitration clause in the buye/s agreement as it may be noted thalsection 79 oftheActbars thejurisdiction ofcivil courts about any maner which falls within the purview ofthis authority, or the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal.

Thus, the intention to render such disputes as non_ arbitrable seems io be clear' Also, section 88 of the Act says that the provisions ofthis Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation ofthe provrsions ofanv PaAe 16ol29 clause which refers to the parties in the event of any frHARERA #"GURUGRAM ComplaintNo.4SSof 2023and other law lor the time being in force.

Further, the authority puts reliance on catcna of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, particularly in ,ryororIal seeils Corporotion Limited v, M.

Madhusudhan Reddy & Anr. (2072) 2 SCC 506, wherein it has been held that the remedies provided underthe Consumer Prot.ction Actnre in addrtion to aDd not in derogation olthe otherlaws in force, consequently the authority would not be bound to reier parties to arbit.ation evcn ilthe agreement between the pafties had an arbitration clause.

F.lt obiections reg,rding fo.cc maieure.

17.

The respondent/promoter has raised the contention that the const.uction of ihe project has been delayed due to force majeur. circumstances such as barr on construction due to orders passed by NCT, majorspread ofCovid-19 ac.oss lvorldwide, suspension of license by the DTCP, Chandisarh and freezins ol accouDts by IiRERA Curugram etc. which is beyond the control ol the rcspondent and are covered uDder clause 5.5 ofthe agreement.

The respondent hirs further submitted that suspension oithe license and ireezing ofaccounis, n.rrting from ]rcb 2023 till date hale created a zero_time scenario for the rcspondent. cspondent. l'urthennore, the final EC is CTE/CI'O which has been received bv the respondent in Irebruary 2018, hcnce the srafi date oaproject is Feb 2018' llowever, aU the pleas advanced in thjs regard are devoid of merits.

As per cl.r use 1 [iv] of the Affordable Ho using Policy, 2 0 13 it is prescribcd that iAl/ st'/r pnjects shatlbe required tabe necessarily completed t'/ithin 4veorsfrom the dote ofapproval ofbuitding plons or g.dnt of environmental cteorance, \\'hrchever ls latet.This dote shatt be referred todsthe 'date of canmencenent of project" lat tlx, purposeolthis policy.

The respondent has obtained enviroDment clearance and bulldinS plan ,pproval in respe.t of the said project on 30.11.2017 and 26.09.2016 respeciively.

Therelbre, the due date ol possession is bejng calculated fiom the date of environnrental clearance, being later.

Further, an Complaint No.485 oI2023 and *HARERA lLomprdntNo.a'sof2orrJnd I \ dhP< j 9- GI]RIIG|iAI,4 L extension of6 months is granted to the respondent in view olnotification no' 913-zo2\ dated 26.05.2020, on account of outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic.

Therefore, the due date of possession was 30.05.2022.

As far as other contentions oi the respondent w.r.t delay in construction of the project is concerned, the same are disallowed as firstlythe orders passed bv NCT banning construct,on in the NCR region was for a very short period of time and thus, cannot be said to impact the respondent'builder leading to such a delay in the completion.

Secondly, the liceDce of the project of the respondent was suspended by DTCP, Haryana vide memo dated 23.02.2023' d& to gravc violat,ons made by it iD making compliance ofthe terms and conditions oithe licence.ln view ofthe same and to protect the interest ofthe allofte€s, the bank account ofthe respondent related to the proj;€t !{as frozen by this Authority vide order dated 24.02.2023.

4.02.2023.

It is well settled principle that a person cannot rrkF benelil or nr' own s rong, Finditrss on the rellefsousht by tie complalnaEt C.l "oirect rhe respondent to Sive d€la,€d Dossession charges at the prescribed rad i.e., MCLR+2% from 26.09 Pozo till the date ofactual physica I possession at the prescrlbcd rrteofinteRsL c.tt birect ttre respondert to erecute the convevarce deed aft€' offering valid ofier olpossession to the comPlalpert On the above_mentioned relie6 sought by the complainant is being taken (og"ther as Ihe trndin8l in one rehel will definilely afle(t lhe result of rhe olher reliefs.

The complainant intends to continue with the project and is seeking delay possession charges as provided under the proviso to section 18(1) of the Act Scc.18[1J proviso reads as under. "Section 18) .

Retum ol dnount ond compdfution 18(1) 1l the pronotet foih .o comptete ot is unable to sNe poss'jion oJ on opo.ncnt Dtot- o' btidtag ........ itowted thot where on otlouee dod not intend to wthdtow frnn the Ptoiect he sholl be pam, by the ptohote., htqest fo. every nohth ol deldr' till the handing ov;r of thi posesioa ot slch rate os ndJ be Prusctib pale ts ot 29 c.

20.

As per clause S.Z talks aboutthe possession olthe unit to the complainants, the relevant portion is reproduceas under:_ "5,2 Possession Time 'Ihe Conpon! sholl sinerel! endeovo. to conpl.te the @nttucn@ oarl olJet the p6s4sioa ol the soi.t lntt wtthtnlive yeon hon the.tote orfie reeivins oftt@nsc ('comnitnent Period"), but subie.l ro force noietre .lo6e oJ rhis Agrcenent ond tinely pdtnqt ol insto dtt bv the A ottee(s).

Bowever n cose the Conpany conpletes the @nstruction priot ta the period al 5 teors the Allottee shall not ruise anv oble.tion in toking the pBression olbr poyment oJ rendining sal. pne and othq .horg6 stipulob ! in the Agreement to Sell. t to Sell.

The Conpon! on obtainihg certilcote Ior oelpotian and use bt the ConPeteht Authorities sholl hdhd ovq the soid unit ta the Allottee for hs/her/their occupation ond u*, subtect ro rhe Allattee hovni conplied with oll the tems and candttions ol the tuid Poli.v and Ag.eehent ta sel onA Poyne^Lt adeosperPornentPlon.' 21.

At the outse! it is relevant to comment on the preset possession clause ofthe agreement wherein the pqssession'hasteensubiedted to all kinds ofterms and conditions of this agreement and applicatlon, and dhe complainant not being in *HARERA *dt- errnuennl,r default undcr any provisions of these agre provisions, iormalities and documen!ation as ComplaintNo.

485 of 2023 and compliance with all by the promoter.

The drafting olthis clause and incorporation of such conditions a.e not only vague and uncertain but so heavily loaded in favour ofthe p.omoter and against the nllottees that even a sin81e default by the allottees in fulfilling formaliti's and documentations ctc. as prescribed by the promoter mav make the possess'on clause irrelevant aor the purpose ol allottees and the commitment date lbr hrnding over possession loses its meaning.

The incorporation olsuch clause in thc bulrer's agreement by the promotcr is not only in grave violation of clause 1(rvl ol the Affordable tlousing Policy, 2013, but also deprive the allottees of their rjght acc.uingafter dela), jn possession.

22 Clauselovl of the Affordable Housing Policy,2013 provides lor completion of allsuch projects licenced underit and thesameis rsproduced as underrorreadv t (1") Complaint No.485 oi2023 and & HARER- ' omo.d n No 48. o ,o,.d,. @ eLtuernv '@hP' ''Att sLch proie.6 thall be.equtred ta be hecesarily.onpletedwxhin 1yeo.s ton the date of apptovot ol btildtrlg plons or sront aI environnental cteoranc., whi.hevcr B ldt r. lhis nate sholt be teletrcd to os the "date al con en.enentalptuten" fu the Putpasealthe palicy. he palicy.

Due date ofhanding over ofpossession: As per clause 1(,vJ olthe Arturdable llousing Policy, 2013 it is prescribed that ",4fl such projects sholl be required to be necessaril! canpleted\ ithm 4 years lrom the date of approvot of building plans ar gront oJ enviran mental clearance, whichever is lakL l his dote shall be relerred to us the "dote af cammencement of praject" lor the purpose al this policy. rtrc respondent has obtained environment clearance and building plan approval in resDect of the said proiect oD 30.11.2017 and 26.09.2016 respectively.

Thereiore, the duc datc oi possession is being c:lculdted from the date ot cnvironmental clearance, being later.

Furthet an extension of 6 months is granted to the respondent in view ofnotification no.9 /3-2020 dated 26.05.2020, on account of outbreak of Covid_19 pandemic.

Therefore, the due date ol possession comes out to be30.05.2022.

Admissibility of delay poss€ssion charges at prescribed rate of interest: Proviso to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to (,ithdraw from the project, hc shall be paid, by the promoter, interest lor every nronth of delay, till the handing ovcr of possession, at such rate as may be prescribed and it has been prescribed under rule 15 of the rules.

Rule 15 has b.cn.eproduced as under: Rule 15.

PreKribed rote oJ interest' I Proviso to section 12 ectioa 1A on.t sub seetion (4) and subsection (7) ol section 191 (1) t'or the putpoe olptortuLase.tton 12, \ectrcn 1a)ond sub se.ttuns (4)ond (?)olsedion 19,the nte.e:t at lhe rcte presuibed shollbe the Stote sonk aJ tndio htghen nuginolcostaliendtdg rate +2%: Praviled thot n casc the Stute Bonk al lndta narcinalcostalle^dihg rot (MC\.R) is nat in us. n shall bc rcploced b! such benchmutk tending rate\ which the Stote Bonk al tntlio tnay ltt Jtam time to tid. bt lending to the gcncralpuhliL.

The legrslaxuc in itswrsdonr in the subordinatc legislation underthe provision olrule 15 ot the .

5 ot the .ules, has determined the prescribed rate ofinte.est The rate oi Paee zo ol29 2',.1.

24.

Complaint No.435 of2023 ard &HARER. 'orDdnrNoabro,zo2Jd-d I -S* GIIRLIGRAM t rnterest so determined by the legislature, h reasonable and if the said rule is lollowed to award the intsrest,,t will ensure irnilorm practice in allthe cases.

Consequently, as per website olthe State Bank of India i.e., httpsr/sbi.co rn, the marginal cost oi lending rate [in short, MCLR] as on date ie.,20.05.2025 is 9.100/0.

Acco.dingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost oi lending.ate +20lo i.e., 11.10%. 'Ihe delinitjon ol term'interest as defined under section 2[za] oi the Act provides that the rate ol,ntercst chargeable from the auottee by the promoter, rn case ofdelault, shall be equal to the rate ofinterest which the promoter shall be liable to pay the allottee, in case ofdefault.

The relevant section is reproduced "ku) "i,turen' d@ns the rots ol intercst pavable bv the Pronatet ar the ollottee, as the cote ho! be. ttt-to-a oa Fo.th" Dutp.,eot t'r -tou)e - (i) the rate of nterest thdrgcoble lron tlP ollottee bv the pronoter' ]n &se al lelurlt shdll be equ.t ta the.ote ol in tcren which the pronotet shull betidbleto po! the allattee incaeoldeloult li) the nbren paloble by the pronob. ro the oLlouee sholl be Jtan the ' dote the p.aiotet re@ived the anount ot hnv port theteoftilt the date the amount ot part thereol ond intete* thereon is refuhded ond the nt.test polable b! the ollatte.to the pronotet sho be lram the dote the ollaxee deloLlts in pdtnent ta the pronote. till the dotu n ]s poid: 'l herefore, intereston thed€laypayments fromthe complainant shall be charged rt the prescribed rate,.e, 11.10q0 by the respo.dent/promoter which is the same as is being granted to the complainant in case of delayed possession On consideralion of the documents available on record and submissions made by both thc parties, the authorit) is satisfied that the respondent is in . nt is in .ontravention oithe Section 11t4)[a] ofthe Act bv not handins over possession by the due date as per the agreement.

Bv virtue of clause 1('vJ oithe Affordable Itousing Policy,2013, the respondent/promoter shallbe necessarilv required to complete the construction oftbe proiectwithin 4 vears from thedateofapproval PaEe 2l ol29 )6 27 2U. cohplaintNo4S5of 2023and *,HARERA $-crtrrcnnu,r ol building plans or grant of environrnental clearance, whichever is later' Therelore, in view of the nndings given above, the due date ofhanding over of possession was 30.05.2022.

However, the respondent has failed to handover possess,on olthe subiectapartment to the complainant tillthe date ofthis order.

Accordingly, ii is the failure ofthe respondent/p.omoter to tulnlits obligations and responsibllities as perthe agreement to band over the possession within the stipulated period. further, there is no document available on record to substantiate the claim of the respondent.

Accordingly, the claim of the respoDdentis rejected beingdevoid ofrierlts.

Moreover, the authority obsenes that there is no document on record from wh,ch it can be ascertained as to whether the respondent has applied for occupation certificate or what is the status of construction ofthe proieat.

H€nce, this ptoject is to be treated as on- goinB proiFct dnd rhe provisrons of rhF Act shdll Pe appltcable equallY to the bur,der ds wellas allottees.

Accord,ngly, the non'compliance of the mandate contained in section 11(41(a) read with proviso to section 1S(1) of the Act on the part ofthe respondent is established.

As such, the allotteeshall be paid, by th; promotet interestfor every month of delay from due date ol possession ie., 30.05 2022 till valid offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority or adualbanding over olpossessio. whichever is earlier' as per section 18[1] oftheAct of2016 read with rile 15 ofthe rules. the rules.

Further, as per section 11(al(0 and section 17(1) of the Act of 2016, the promoter is under an obligation to get the conveyance deed executed in favour ofthe complainant.

Whereas as per section 19(11) oftheAct of2016, thealloftee is also obligated to participate towards regiskation olthe conveyance deed ol the unit in question. tlowever, there is nothing on the record to show that the r.spondent has applied for occupation certificate or what is the status oi th€ ComplaintNo.405of 2023and lP HARERA I corpL,nr \o a05 ot roz3 and " s otter SGURUGRAI/ L development of the above-mentioned project.

In view of the above, the respondent is dire€ted to handover possession of the flat/unit and execute conveyance deed in iavour of the complainant in terms of se€tion 17(11 oithe Act of 2016 on payment of stamp duo, and registration charges as applicable, within three months after obtaining occupation certificate trom the competent G,lll To restrain the respondent from terminatlngthe unit till the flnal disposal of the present comPlalnt The compla,nant in the present matter is seeking possession of the unit along with delay possession charges and the authority has already deliberated the same in the findings w.r.t. relief no.

1 &2 in the above paragraphs accordingly, in view ofthe same the present relief stands redundant.

G,lv To appoitrt a local commlssloner to.arry out the tasks as mentioned in pam 34 ofthecomplairt; c.v io conducr a roreniicaudil orthe books ofa+counts ofthe respondent as per tzsk menlioned ln para 35 ofthe comPlalhr c,vl To take a.tion for vlolation of sectton 6, 1.e., on_extension of rcSlstration C.VU Direct the respondert to provide on amdavlt a date till whlch a v.lid otter olpossession shall be SiveG lf Ue resPprdent fails to Provldc dte same, peoal pro.eedinss lor violatioh of sedbn 4(2)01(c) be inldaled .sainst the respondent The complainant has sought some other reliefs such as appoiniment oi L. ment oi L.C, conduct lorensic audit olthe books ofaccounts of the .espondent, initiation oi penal proceedings for violation of Section a(21[l)[c), Section 6 of the Acr, 2016 et..

The Authority observes that due to several continuing violations ol the provisions of the Act, 2016 by the respondcnt, the Authority has already taken Suo motu cognizance of the project vide complaint beatir'g no.

RER4'G RG' 70 a7' 2023 and freezed the bank account ofthe respondent related to the project vide order dated 24.02.2023.

Therelore, the authority is proceeding to de€ide onlv the main relief sought by the complajnant in the present complaint i e'' delav :12.

Complaint No 485 of2023 and possession charges, possession and execution ofconveyance deed on the basis oldocuments available on record as well as submission made by the parties.

G.VUI Direct the respondent to provide a valid physlcal possession after receipt of ocruPancy certlncate.

34.

The respondent is legally bound to meet the pre_requisites for obta,ning occupation cert,ficate from the competent authority.

It is unsatiated that even after the lapse oi more than 2 years from the due date ol possession the respondent has failed to complcte the construction and applv for OC to the competent authority.

The promoter is duty bound to obtain OC and hand over possession only after obta,ning OC.

G,lx Direct the respondent to give bifurcatlon ofthe totalsale p.ice lncluding the clarincatlon of.ost ofparkins under the Affordable HoBiog Pollcv, 20r 3. c.x To restain the respondent from demandiDg car pa.king charaes from the 4. lheclouseno atnil ofthe Aflordobte Haus,P Polic! doted lgthAugusa 20t3 .elated h potkins natnsshollbe subnituEd with thelallowingi "4(iii) Porking Norms: o Mdndatarl non cho.?eableq.s ECS po*ing spuce t Mandotary parking tPote at the rcte aI haf tiquivalent Car SPae (Ecs) far each dwettins unitsho beptoided. ii anly ane two. y ane two.wheelet porking eE sholl be eonorked for each lot, which sholl be ollotted anlv ta the J'lot own 6.

The Pa.king bor of tuo wheelers shall be OBm x 2.5n untess otheryise sPecilie'l in the zoningPlan The balonce ovailoble porking spoce tJ anv, bevon'l rhe ollocoted t||a'oheelcr potkiig etes, .ur be cornarked as free "isitot mr park lltspo.e b optohal ond .hu.seahte ttarking spoce ot the rate of A5 ECS per dwellin9rnit i The.olanner mo!

P.ovide on addtDnol and aptionol porktng spoce oxihun to the extent of hall EquNolent cot spa'e (Ecs) pe' dwelling unit i\. tn Lase \uch optlanut lratkntlt spoQ I provded b! the catanlrer) ,naxmun olone.ot potkng spoce per dvcllins uhit con be oltatted Pase 24 a\ 29 #IABERI\ S- GURUGRAI/ .omplainants. :15. lli. said prolect is the afiordable housins project and as per the lat.st anrendment dated 04.01.2021 in the said Policy 2013, which it is reprodu'ed 'rs HARERA ComplaintNo.4S5of 2023and GURUGRAI by the coloniser,ato rcte not exceedns 5% olthe cost ollot to sLch ollattee. c.

Mi\celloneoLs i tncoseswhete ti.enses undetAHP 2013 otreod! stand granted ahd buil,)ing plons stond opprcved Pithautavotlnstheoptiohol as Ecs per dwellnll uhit potktn! spoce, the colontet sholl be requlrcd ta \ubntit the canent afdt kan tea thtrds ol the dllouees as pet the ptov k ions of Se i n n t 1.1 Reo I tx ta te ( Re g u I o n oh o hd Developn ent ) Act, 2016, fot the purpase oI anehdnent in buildtns plohs lot avoihng such odtiitionol ond aptionol AS ECS per dwelling uhtt porkinlt spoce.

Fu.ther, this benelt sholl not be ovoiloble for the p.ojects wherein a.cupotion cerqcaF X oll the.eedential toweB hos already been abtoine,i ti Additi.nol Dotknp nonnsaid potoneteB,tfonr,con be specifed tn thezontns Plan ' 36.

In vierl/ ofthe above provjsions, the respondent/promoter is bound to comply the terms and condition of the Aftordable Croup Housing Policy, 2013 a..ordingly, no direction w.r.t. the same can be deliberated by the authority at thLs stage. hLs stage.

C,xl Directthe respondentto giv€ .trti_profiteerlng credlt/input tax credit to the comPlainant.

G.xll To restraln the .espondent from demandlng Labour Cess, VAT, work Contract Tax and Powe.

Backup ctarges , GST Input Tax Creditr - 37 The complainant has sought the reliefwith regard to direct the respondent to give anti profiteering credit/rnput tax cred ia to the compla,nants and charge the C Sl as per .ules and regulatio ns.

Howev€r, no specifications have been provided Thc respondent/promoter is under obligation to adhere the provisions ot IICST/CGST Act,20l7 and to pass on bcnefit, as applicable.

In the event, the respondent/promoter has not passed the benefit ollTC to the buyers oithe unlt in contraventio! to the provisions ofsection 171[1) ofthe HGST Act, 2017.

The complninant alloftee is at liberty to approach the competent authoriiy for seeking reliefin tenns olapplicable Act & Rules 38 Further, the cornplainant has sought the reliefto restrain the respondent from dcmandi.s Labour Cess,vAT,WCTand powerbackup charges Although, as per Complajnt No 4a5 o12023 and eHARERA coYpdn'\o4a\o'20,,d'o Seunuennv L cother record, no demand under the above said heads have been made by the respondent till date, however in claus.4.9 [iii) and (,v) ofthe buyer's agreement it has been mentioned that the allottee is Iiable to pay separatelythe above_said charges as per the demands raised by the respondent.

Therefore, in the interest oflustice and to avoid fu rth er litigatio., theAuthority is deliberating its findings on the above said charges.

The Labour cess is levied @ l'h on the cost of construction incurred by an employer as per the provisioDs oa sections 3(11 and 3(3) oi the Build,ng and Other Construction Workers' Welfar€ Cess Act, 1996 read with Notificat,on No.

S.o 2899 dated 26.9.1996.

It is levied and collected on the cost of construction incurred by €mployers including contractors under specific conditions. onditions.

Iuoreover, this issue has already becn dealt with by the authority,n complaint berring no.

962 of 2019 ntled Mr. sumit Kumar Gupta and Alrr' vs sepset Pruperties Privdte Llmit d wherein it was held that since labour cess is to be paid by the rcspondent, as such no labour cess should be separately charged bv the respondent.

The authority is of the view that the allottee ls neither an cmployer nor a contractor and labourcess is notatax but a fee.

Thus, the allottee cannot be made liable to pay any labour cess to the respondent and it is the respondent builder who is solely responsible lor the disbursement oi said - vAT lvalue addedtax): - ]'he promot.r is entitled to charge VAT from the allottees where the sane oas levirble, at the applicable ratc, ilthey h.rve not opted lor composition schenle However, if composition scheme has been availed, no VAT is leviable.

Further, thc promotershallcharge actualVATfrom th€ allottees/prospectivebuyers paid by the promoter to the conceroed department/authoritv on pro_rata basis complaint No 435 of2023 and &HAREI- ,orf ,,,\o4b(o,,u,.,d 1, A ^ ^ ^^.,, 50, q 4. :" i.u inr.

Itowever, the complainant would also be entitled to proof ofsuch payments to the concern.d department along wrth a computation proportionate to the allotted unit, before making paymeni under the aforesaid heads. , wCT [work contracttax):- The Authorig, is of the view that, as per the definition of term 'work contract' under Section 2(1191 oithe CCST Act, 2017, the allottee is neither an employer nor a contractor and the same is Dot applicablc in the present case.

Thus, the allotteecannot be nrade liable to pay thc same to the respondent. i.

Power Backup Charges: - The issue of power back-up charges has already been clarified by the office of D'ICP, Haryana vide oflice order dated 31.01.2024 whercin it has categoncally cl. ncally cl.rified the mandatory services to be provided by the colonizer/developer in altordable group housing colonies and services for which maintenance charges can be charged from the allottces as per consumption.

Accordingly,the promoter cn only chargc nlaintenance/use/utiljty charges lrom the complainanF allottees as per consuDrption as prescribed in category II oi the olflce order dared 31.0r.2024. c,xlll To restrain thc respondent trom chargiry any maiDtenance charges in future as the .omplainant ls not boutrd to pay the same under the Aflordable Housirg Policy, 2013.

The Authority observes that, the respondent/promoter till date neilher conrpleted the construction of the project nor obtained occupancy certificate of the proiect.

As per the clarificatjon iv.r.t maintenance charges to be levied on altbrdable group housing proiects being given by DlCP, Haryana vide cl,uification no.

P\:27A/2024/3676 datcd 31.01.2024, it is very clearlv m€ntioned that the utility charges (which includes electricity bill, water bill, propertytax!vastecollection charg.sorany repair inside the individual fl at etc.l can be charged from ths allottees as pcr consumptions.

41. .12 complaint No.485 of2023 and & I.ARER- I , on p1,., \o. asi o, ,0r1"n,r &GLR.GRA[/ 5dTI Accordingly, the.espond€nt is directed to charge the maintenance/use /utility charges from the complainants-allottees as perconsumptions basis as has been cla.ifled by the Directorate of ]own and Country Planning, Haryana vide cla.illcation dated 31.01.2024.

Directions of the authority H.nce, theauthority hereby passes this order and issue the following directions under section 37 ofthe Act to ensure complance of obligations casted upon the promoter as per tbe lunctions enkusted to the authoriry under section 34(0 of i.

The respondent/promoter is directed to pay interest to theconplainan(, against the paid-up amount at the prescribed rate of 11.100/o p.a. for eve.y month oi delay rrom the due date of possesdon i.e., 30 05. e., 30 05.2022 till valid offer ol possession plus 2 months aiter obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority or actual handing over oi possession, whichever is earlier, as per section 18(11 of the Act oi 2016 read with rule I5 or rhe . ulF\. ii Th e arrears oi such interest accrued from 30 0 5 2022 lill the date ol ord er by the authority shall be paid by the promoter to the allottee(sl wrthin a pcriod of 90 days irom date ofthis order and interest For every month oi delay shall be pajd by the promoter to the alloftee(sl before 10rh of the subsequent month as per rule 15(2) ofthe rules iii.

The respondent/promoter shall handover possession ol the flat/unit and execut. co nveyance deed in favo u r oi thc compla inan (s) in terms of section 17[1J olthe Act of 2016 on payment oistamp duty and registration charges as appljcable, withiD three months after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority.

44 H.

45.

HARER'r Gl]RUGRAI/ Complaint No.485 of2023 and The complainant(s) are directed to pay outstanding dues, if any, after adjustment ofinterest for the delayed period.

The respondent/promoter shall not charge anything from the complainant(s) wh,ch is not the part oitheAffordable Housing Policy,2013 as well as buyert agreement.

The rate ofinterest chargeable trom the allotteets) by the promoter, in case of delault shall be charged at the prescribed rate ie, 11.10% by the respondent/promoter which is the same rate of ,nterest which the promoter shall be l,able to pay th€ allottee(s), in case of default ,e., the delayed possession charges as persection 2[za) oftheAct.

46 lhs decision shallmutatis mutandis apply to cases mentio ned in para 3 ofthis order wherein details ofpaid up amount is mentioned in each ofthe complainls Complaint as wellas applications, ilany, stand d isposed off accordinglv.

47.

Iiiles beconsi8ned to registry. t (Asrok sa cfi;)I Haryana Real Dated:20.05-2025 \.

05-2025 \.t -t2 (viiay KumarGoyal) (Arun Kumarl Chairman Estate Regrl lato ry Au th ority, Curugranr )