MR GIRISH KUMAR GHULIANI vs ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED

Complaint No.

ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED SAMYAK PROIECTS PVT.

L PROJECT NAME ANSAL HUB 83 BOULEVARD cR/6BL/2022 Girish Kr. cR/ZtLz/2022 ffiHARERA Llt i{i ffiCUnUGRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY A GURUGRAM Date of decision: ORITY, L.02.2024 Member as above before this Real Estate lation and with rule Develo Rules, 201.7 r of section 4)(a) of the at the pro shall be bilities and ons to the parties. and the the project, / Page 1 of23 CORAM: Shri Ashok Sangwan 1.

This order shall dispose Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed responsible for all its obligations, respons allottees as per the agreement for sale inter se The core issues emanating from them a similar in complainant(s) in the above referred matte are NAME OF THE BUILDER S.

No.

Case No.

Case title APPEARANCE 1 Sh.

Amandeep Kadyan Sh.

Sanilya Arora 2 Anita Tyagi and Vinita llyagi V/s Ansal Housing Limited and Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd.

Sh.

AmBndeep Kadyan Sh.

Sanflya Arora HARERA ffi- GURUGI?AM namely, "Ansal Hub B3 Boulevard" (group housing colony) being developed by the same respondent/promoter i.e., M/s Ansal Housing Limited and Samyak Projects Pvt.

The terms and conditions of the buyer's agreements, fulcrum of the issue involved in all these cases pertains to failure on the part of the promoter to deliver tinrely possession of the units in question, seeking award of delay possession charges along with intertest.

The details of the complaints, reply to status, unit no., date of agreement, possession clause, due date of possession, total sale consideration, total paid amount, and relief sought are given in the table below: Complaint No.

58L of 2022 and ors.

3.

Project Name and Location .ANSAL HUB 83 BOULEVARD " Sector-83, Gurugram.

Possession Clause:30 "30.

The Developer shall offer possession of the Unit within 42 r,nonths from the obtaining all the required sanctions and approval sanctions and apprc,val necessary for commencement of construction, whichever is later subject to timely payment o payment of all dues by the Buyer and subject to force majeure circumstances as descrilted in clause 31.

Further there shall be a grace period of 6 months allowecl to developer over ctnd above the period of 42 months as above in offerinlT the possession of the unit," Emphasis supplied Occupation certificate: - Not obtained Complaint No., Case Title Unit no. and area admeasuring Date of' builder buyer agreement Due date of delivery of possession Sale Consideratio n (sc)/ Total Amount paid by the complainant( s)(AP) cR/6BL/2022 G-t23, admeasuring 238 sq. ft.

02.05.2015 02.05.2079 (42 months from date of agreement i.e., TSC- T 36,17,1,04/- AP- T 33,49,7391- Page2 of 23 ,,. ffiHARERA ffiGURUGnnt'lt 4.

The aforesaid co promoter on account executed between b against the agreement ng over charges n for non- promoter/ ndates the promoters, id unit for of delay p the possession by compliance of statutory obligations on the part of respondent in terms of section 3affl of the Act which authority to ensure compliance of the obligations cast upon the allotteefs) and the real estate agents under the Act, th regulations made thereunder. as an in and the 2022 and 02.05.2015 as the date of commenceme nt of construction is not known.

Grace period allowed being unqualified 0R/ZLLZ/2022 G-069, admeasuring 460 sq. ft.

18.1.2.2014 L8.L2.20L8 (42 months from date of agreement i.e., L8.72.20L4 as the date of known. -t ,30,484/- -t ,08,062/- Page 3 of23 Y 5.

Complaint No. r 83, MA Nature of the project 7.201,8 3L.L2.2020 DTCP License No.

L13 of2008 valid upto 31 Name of licensee ffiHARERA ffi ouRUGRAM A.

7.

The facts of all the complaints filed by the complainant(s also similar.

Out of the above-mentioned case, the pa CR/21L2/2022 Anita Tyagi and Vinita Tyagi V/s Limited and Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd. are being taken in for determining the rights of the allottee(s) qua delay along with interest and compensation. pensation.

Project and unit related d The particulars of the project, i of sale considerati paid by the complainant(s handing over delay period, if any, h owing ta form: cR/21L2/202 v/s Ltd. lottee(s)are of lead case Housing nsideration ion charges the amount possession, Page4of23 r' Sr.

Particulars Details 1,.

Name of the project 2.

Commercial 3.

Project area 2.60 acres 4.

RERA Registered/ not registered 5.

6.

Browz Technologies Pvt.

Ltd and 4 others ffiHARERA Itri{iffi oUnUGRAM Complaint No.

Unit admeasuring 460 sq. ft. (Page no.55 of Date of builder buyer agreement 78.L2.2014 (page no.

50 of Possession clause possession of the months from the and above the 1 shall offer t within 42 ining all the nd approval necessary of rs later t of all subject to 31.

Further period of 6 42 months possession w 78.L2.20t8 (Note: 42 agreement i.e., L date of com construction is period allowed date of 20L4 as the Total sale consideration Rs.72,30,484 Page 5 of23 7.

Unit no.

G-069 (Page no.

55 of complaint) B.

9.

10.

1L.

Due date of delivery of possession 1,2.

HARERA GUl?UGRAM B.

Facts of the complaint B.

The complainants have 9.

That based on complainant 460 sq. ft. in the Sector 83, bmissions in complaint: ,t made by G-06 HUB nt ndent, measuring ulevard", 7 ,00,000 /- through cheque.

That the respondent to du nt, executed r buyer agreement on 18. buyer agreement the b 240/o per annum, 24 of agreement if buyer fails to pay due instalments within period, money, the respondent could cancel the agreement and forfeit the without giving any notice to buyer which in itself is in nature.

Whereas, as per clause 34, the developer/ respondent cleverly and specifically accepted a meagre liability to pay Rs.

5/ sq. ft. per [as per payment of complaint) Total amount paid by the complainant Rs.73,08,062/- (as alleged by page no.05 of nant on nt) Occupation certificate Offer of possession month on the super area for the delay in offering of Page 6 of23 v Complaint No.

681 of 2022 and ors.

2 and ors.

13.

14.

Not obtained 15.

Not Offered HARTRA GURUGI?AM Complaint No.

L1,.

That the total cost of the said commercial unit is Rs 72,30,484/-and a sum of Rs 73,08,062/- was paid by the complainants in time bound manner.

This amount constituted more than 950/o of the total sum taken from the complainant within 4 years.

The relspondent declined to complete the project after collecting money and there has been little progress in construction from 201,6 onwards.

That as per section 19 (6) the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act,201'6, complainant has fulfilled his responsibility in regard to making the necessary payments in the manner and within the time specified in the t2. said agreement.

Therefore, the complainant herein is not in breach of any of its terms of the agreement.

That the complainant booked a comrnercial unit dated 1,g.06.2013 and as per developer buyer agreement, respondents are liable to offer possession on or before 1,7.12.20L8.

The comprlaipant visited several times in the respondent office and project site, regarding possession of the unit and delay interest however respondent did not reply tiil date.

That due to the malafide intentions of the respondent and non-delivery of the commercial unit the complainants have accrued huge losses on account of the future of the complainants and their family'are rendered dark as the planning with which the complainants invested his hard -.?rred monies have resulted in sub-zero results and borne thorns instead of bearing fare fruits.

Due to delay in possession complainants have incurring huge financial and mental harassment month after month complainants visited respondent's office several times and requested for possession but the respondent did not bother to respond till date.

C.

Relief sought by the complainants: PageT of23 a/ ffiHARERA ffi.-GIJRUGI?AM 15.

The complainants have sought following relief(s) a. lief(s) a.

Direct the respondent to complete the over the possession of the commercial which mention in brochure. b.

Direct the respondent to Rs.

73,08,062/- at the rate possession. c.

Direct the respondent to buyer agreement. d.

Pass an order for and taken the On the date of promoter about th relation to section 1 Reply by the 18.

That the current dispute cannot be governed by the because of the fact that the builder buyer agreement si1 complainant and the answering respondent was in the 1 submitted that the regulations at the concerned time 16.

D.

17.

Gurugram.

Upon the satisfaction of the of the site, title, locatibn plani; ui.. u allotted to him on 19.06.201,3. regulate the project and not a subsequent legislation i.e.

Page B of 23 ,/ project im unit with all pay delay interest on of 24o/o till the handing amount of the physical ed clauses developer ainant ndent/ tted in plead guilty. t for Sector 83, inspection G-069 was and hand amenities Act, 20L6 the 2014.

It is would 20L6.tt complainant shop bearing Complaint No.

681 of 20ZZ and ors. ffiHARERA ffi GURUGRAM Complaint No.

681 of 2022 and ors. is further submitted that Parliament would not make the operation of a statute retrospective in effect.

19.

That even if for the sake of argument, the averments and the pleadings in the complaint are taken to be true, the said complaint has been preferred by the complainant belatedly.

The complainant has admittedly filed the complaint in the year 2024 and the cause of action accrue in 2018 as per the complaint itself.

Therefore, it is submitted that the complaint cannot be filed before the HRERA Gurugram as the same is barred by timitation.

20.

That even if the complaint is admitiiiOtoUe true and correct, the agreement which was signed in the year 2015 Without coercion or any duress cannot be called in question today.

It is submitted that the builder buyer agreement provides for a penalty in the event of a delay in giving possession. ossession.

It is submitted that clause 34 of the said agreement provides for Rs.

5/ sq foot per month on super area for any detay in offering possession of the unit as mentionr:d in clause 30 of the agreement.

Therefore, the complainant will be entitled to invoke the sard clause and is barred from approaching the Hon'blle Commission in order to alter the penalty clause by virtue of this complaint more than 9 years after it was agreed upon by both parties.

21,.

That the respondent had in due course of time obtainecil all necessary approvals from the concerned authorjities.

It is submitted thrat the approval for digging foundation and basement was obtained and sanctions from the department of mines and geology were obtained in 2Ct12.

Thus, the respondents have in a timely and prompt manner ensured that the requisite compliances be obtained and cannot be faulted on giving delayed possession to the complainant.

Page 9 of2$ ffiHARERA ffi- GIRUGRAM 22.

That the answering respondent has adequately explained the delay. it is submitted that the delay has been occasioned on account of things beyond the control of the answering respondent.

The builder buyer agreement provides for such eventualities and the cause for delay is completely covered in the said clause.

The respor:rdent ought to have cornplied with the orders of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in cwP No.

20032 of 2008, dated L6.02.201,2,31.07.201.2,21.08.2012.

The said orders banned the extraction of, water which is the backbone of the construction process.

Similarly, the complaint itself re,ueals that the correspondence from the answering respondent specifies force majeure, demonetization and the orders of the Hon'ble NGT prohibiting construction in and around Delhi and the covlD -L9 parrdemic among others as the causes which contributted to the stalling of the project at crucial junctures for considerable spells. le spells.

That the answering respondent and the complainant adlmittedly have entered into a builder buyer agreement which provides for the event of delayed possession.

It is submitted that clause 31 of the builder buyer agreement is clear that there is no compensation to be sought by the complainant/prospective owner in the event of delay in pos;session.

That the answering respondent has clearly provided in clause 31 the consequences that follow from delayed possession.

Thr: complainant cannot alter the terms of the contract by preferring a complaint before the Hon'ble HRERA Gurugram.

That the complainant had signed and agreed on builder bu'yer agreement dated 27.04.2015.

That perusal of the said agreement would show that it is Complaint No.

Page 10 of23 / 23.

24.

25.

HARERA ffiGUI?UGI?AM a Tripartite Agreement wherein M/s Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd is also a party to the said agreement.

26.

That the perusal of the builder buyer agreement at page 3 w'ould show that M/s Samyak Proiects Pvt. ltd not only possesses all the rights and unfettered ownership of the said land whereupon the project namelyAnsal boulevard, Sector 83 is being developed, but also is a developer in the said project.

That the operating lines at page 3 of the builder buyer agreemenr are as follow: "The Developdr has-)fr,ntered into an agreement with the Confirming Party 3 i.e M/s samjflHlpioi"r* Pvt.

Ltd to jointty promote, develop and market the proposql project being developed on the land os aforesaid." 27 .

The said M/s Samyak Project Pvt.

Ltd, in terms of its arrangement with the respondent could not develop the sraid project well within time as was agreed and given to the respondent, the delay, if any, is on l.he part of M/s Samyak Project Pvt.

Ltd. not on the part of respondent, because the construction and development of the said project was underrtaken by M/s Samyak Project Pvt.

28.

That in an arbitral proceedings before the Ld.

Arbitrator fustice A. fustice A.K Sikri, M/s Samyak Project Pvt. has taken over the present project the answering respondent for completion of the project and the respondent has no locus or say in the present project.

29.

30.

E.

Written submissions fiIed by respondent no.

Z That the present matter has been filed by the complainant rryith respect to unit no.

G-069 in the project "Boulevard 83", Gurugram, Haryana.

That the present complaint has been filed by the complainant against in collusion with the respondent no.1 i.e.

Ansal Housing ancl Construction Complaint No.

681 of 2022 and Page 11 of23 ,/ HARERA M GUI?UGI?AIVI Limited and it is clearly evident ftom the documents complainant with its complaint.

31.

However, the Hon'ble Authority vicle its dated 03.11.20 defence of the respondent no.

2 and proceeded ex respondent no.

2.

32.

The respondent no.2 has already filed a short affidavit / by the off the against the the same was submitted in the registry on .2024.

33.

That the application is filed ent no.

2 to clarification with respect to the relief mplainant.

The lainant has not filed a reply to the fy the rel in the complaint as to from s sough 34.

That the Authority ich liability to f. i.e Ansal comply with the o Housing and 337 of 0, decision dated 1,9 /08/2021 possession charges delaying respondent 1 i.e Ansal & 8059 of order for 35.

The application of the respondent regarding rejection ground of jurisdiction stands rejected.

The authority o that it has territorial as well as subject matter jurisdiction to complaint for the reasons given belolv.

F.

I Territoriat jurisdiction an Complaint No. of 2022 and ef the present Page L2 of23 , 36.

HARERA GUr?UGRAM As per notification no.

L/92/201.7-LTCP dated 1, .LZ.ZO|T and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction Regulatory Authority, Gurugram shall be entire Gu purpose with offices situated in Gurugram.

In the present in question is situated within the planning area of Gu Therefore, this authority has complete territorial jurisdi the present complaint.

II Subiect matter iurisd Section 11,(4)[a) of the Act, responsible to the reproduced as Section 77 'i6 rn, (a) be under the thereunder or association of apartments, plots or common areas to the as the case Section 34(f) of the upon the Act and the So, in view of the provisions of the Act quoted above, complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding obligations by the promoter leaving aside compensation decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by the compl stage.

37.

38. ed by Town Estate trict for all the project m District. deal with des that the pro shall be r sale.

1.1(4)(a) is for sale, or the competent agents has pliance of is to be at a later the the the 'ity, Page 13 of23 Complaint No.

HARERA ffi- GURUG|IAM G.

Findings on the relief sought by the complainants.

G.I Direct the respondent to complete the project imrnediately and hand over the possession of the commercial unit ,with all basic amenities which mention in brochure.

G.II Direct the respondent to pay rlelay interest on parid amount of Rs.

73,08,062/- at the rate of 249t/o till the handing over the physical possession.

39.

In the present matter the coillplainant was allotted unit no.

G-069, admeasuring 460 sq. ft. in the project "Ansal Hub 83 Boulervard" Sector 83 by the respondent-builder for a total sale consideration of \ 72,30,484/- and they have paid a sum of t 73,08,062/- A buyer's agreement dated 1,8.12.2014 was executed between the complainant and rr:spondent no.

1 wherein respondent no.

2 was the confirming party.

As per clause 30 of the BBA, respondent no.

1 was obligated to complete the construction of the project and hand over the possession of the subject unit with in 4|months from obtaining all the required sanctions and approvall sanctions and approval necessary for commencement of construc f construction, whichever is later.

The due date of possession comes out to be 18.12.2018.

The occupation certificate for the project has not yet been obtained frornL the competent authority.

40.

As per the BBA) respondent no.

2fland owner) and respondent no.

1(developer) entered into a MoU dated 1,2.04.2013 whereby the development and marketing of the project was to br: done by the respondent no.

1 in terms of the license/permissions granted by the DTCP, Haryana.

Upon failure of respondent no.

L to perform its otlligations as per Complaint No.

581 of 2022 and PageL4of23 7 Complaint No.

68L of 20ZZ and 0rs.

41,.

The complainant i.e., Ansal Housing Pvt.

Ltd. in the petition sought various - reliefs including to stay the opeiation of the termination letter dated award is given.

The Arbitral Tribunal vide order dated 31,.08.2021 granted no stay on termination notice dated 1-0.11,.2020 and no restraining order in this regard was passed against the M/s Samyak Projects Pvt.

Further, vide order dated 1.3.10.2021 of the sole arbitrator respondent no.

1 was directed to handover the aforementioned project to the respondent no.

Following the directive outlined in the order dated 13.1,Ct.2021 of the sole arbitrator, respondent no.

L handed over the project to respondent no, 2 via a possession letter dated L4.10.2021, for the purpose of undertaking the remaining construction tasks.

Subsequently, on 02.Og,Zoz2, the Sole Arbitrator directed respondent n<>.

2 to finalize the project within the stipulated timeline, specifically by, the conclusion of fune 2OZ3 and to collect funds from the allottees with a condition that the amount so collected shall be put in escrow account.

42.

The authority is of the view that the builder buyer agreement dated 1,8.1,2.2014 was signed by the complainants and the resp,cndent no.

1.

The HARERA ffi- GUI?UGI?AM MoU and complete the construction of the project w'ithin the agreed timeline, respondent no. ondent no.

2 terminated the said MoU 'n,ide notice dated 1,0.11'.2020 and issued a public notice in newspaper for termination of the MoU.

The matter pursuant to the dispute was referred to the Delhi High Court under section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, L996 and vide order dated 22.01.2021 Hon'ble High Court of Delhi appointed the Hon'ble Justice A.K.

Sikri, former fudge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India as a sole arbitrator of Arbitrrl T.ibilfi*{i+*;= 1.0.1,1,.2020 and the public notice dated L6.12.2020 till the final arbitral Page 15 of23 ./' HARERA GUI?UGI?AM Real Estate (Regula (zk) O a person (i0 a person who constructs promoter respondent no.

2 is a confirming party to that BBA.

In lder buyer agreement dated 18.1.2.20t4 it was specifically mentioned respondent into a MoU the project no.

2[and owner) and respondent no.

1(developer) en permissions i.e., Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd. cancelled the t vide terminati notice dated 1,0.11.2020 and the ma before the tribunal appointed by Delhi High Cou er dated 22.01,.20 t is relevant to refer the definition o nder the 2(zkJof the 15.

Definitions.- independent converts an the purpose of persons and person also constructs structures on any of the plots, for purpose of selling to other persons all or some of the plots in said project, whether with or without structures thereon; or (iii) xxxxxxxx 43.

The authority observes that landowner is covered by definition of person who promoter under sub clause (iJ or (ii) of section Z(zk). or causes to be constructed a building or ts is purpose dated 12.04.2013 whereby the development and marketi was to be done by the respondent no.

1 in terms of the lice granted by the DTCP, Haryana.

Although the respondent a of if such building or apartments are meant for Page 16 of23 ffi ffi uiq{s u{d Complaint No.

681 of 20ZZ and orls.

HARERA ffi, GURUGRAIV Complaint No, 681 of 2O2Z and 0rs. selling to other persons.

Similarly, a person who devr:lops land into a project i.e. oject i.e., land into plots is a promoter in respect of the fact that whether or not the person also constructs structures on any of the plots.

It is clear that a prson develops land into plots or constructs building or apartment for the purpose of sale is a promoter.

The words, "causes to be constructed,, in definition of promoter is capable of covering the land,owner, in respect of construction of apartments and buildings.

There may be a situation where the landowner may not himself develops larrd into plots or constructs building or apartment himself, but he causes it to be constructed or developed through someone else.

Hence, the landovrner is expressly covered under the definition of promoter under Section Z (zk)sub clause (iJ and [iiJ.

44' Further, the authority observes that the occupation cr:rtificate for the project is yet to be received and the project stands transferred to the respondent no.

2 who is now responsible to complete the same.

45' In view of the above, the liability under provisions of Section 1B[1) of the Act & Rules read with builder buyer agreement shall be borne by both the respondents jointly and severally and the liability to handover the unit shall lie with respondent no.

46' The complainants intend to continue with the project and are seeking delay possession charges interest on the amount paid. provisg to section 18 provides that where an allottee does not intend to withrdraw 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 rure r.5 of the rures: "section 78: ' Return of amount and compensation ^/ PagelT of23 ffiHARERA #hGTJttUGRntrl Complaint No.

6i81 of 2022 and ors.

1B(1).

If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartmenl plot, or building. building. - (a) in accordance with the terms of the ogreement for sale or, as the cqse may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or (b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on occount of suspension or revocation of the registrotion under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the ailottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be ll ih this behalf including cor,npensation in the monner as provided. project, he shall be paid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing,Aigr b$tfie,,,pbssessfon, at such rate as may be 47.

Clause 30 of the builder buyer agreement (in short, agreernent) provides for handing over of possession and is reproduced below: prescribed," force majeure circu 'in clause 31.

Further there shall be a grace period of 6 months allowed to developer over and above the period of 42 months as 48.

Due date of po 30 of the agreement dated 78.L2.2014, the possession of the allotted unit was supposed to be offered within a stipulated timeframr: of 42 months from obtaining all required sanctions and approvals necessary flor commencement of construction, whichever is later.

Furthelr, grace period of 6 months is sought.

The date of start of construction is not knovvn.

Therefore, the due date is calculated from date of execution of builcler ,/ Page 18 ctf 23 ffiHARERA ffi, GURUGrIAM 49.

681 of 2022 ancl ors. buyer agreement i.e., 1B.LZ.\0L4.

Hence, the due date comes out to be t8.72.20L8 including grace period of 6 months as it is unqqalified.

Payment of delay possession charges at prescribed rate of interest: The complainants are seeking delay possession charges at the prescribed rate of interest. interest.

Proviso to section L8 provides that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw from the project, he shall be paid, by the promoter, -'[Proviso to section 72, section 78 and (1) Forthepu interest for every month of delay,'."t .t!. handing over of'possession, at such rate as may be prescribdn*$,itifr*Sribeen prescribed under rule 15 of rate (MCLR) is not in use, it shall be replaced by such benchmark lending rotes which the State Bank of tndia may fix from time to time for lending to the general public.

The legislature in its wisdom in the subordinate legislation under the provision of rule 15 of the rules, has determined the pre:;cribed rate of ted by the legislature, is reasonable the interest, it will ernsure uniform 51. practice in all the cases. consequently, as per website of the State Bank of India i.e., https://sbi.co.in, the marginal cost of lending rate (in short, MCLR) as on date i.e., 21.02.2025 is 9.l|o/o.

Accordingly, the prescribed rate of interest will be marginal cost of lending rate +Zo/o i.e., 1 L.LOo/o.

The definition of term 'interest' as defined under section Z(za) of the Act provides that the rate of interest chargeable from the a,llottee by the I Page 19 of23 52.

50.

HARERA ffi GUI?UGRAM 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.

The relevant section is reproduced below: "(za) "interest" meens the rates of interest payable by the pra,moter or the allottee, as the case may be.

Explanation. -For the purpose of this clause- O the 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 poy the allottee, in case of default; the interest payable by thei piomoter to the allottee shatl be from the date the promoter t or any part thereof till the date tLerest thereon is refunded, ond the interest payable by the =the promoter shall be fro all be from the date the allottee defo ihe.pyomoter titl the date it is paid;" from the complainants shall be LL.L0o/o by the respon dent/pro moter which is the same as is being gr:anted to them in case of delayed possession charges.

54.

On consideration of the documents available on record and submissions made by the parties regarding contravention as per provis;ions of the Act, the authority is satisfied that the respondent is in contravention of the section 71,(4)(a) of the Act by not handing over possession by the due date as per the agreement.

By virtue of clause 30 of the buyer's agreement, the possession of the subject unit was to be delivered within stipulated time i.e., by LB.1,2.2OLB.

However, till date no occupation certificate has been received by respondents and neither possession has been handed over to the allottee till date.

55.

The Authority is of considered view that there is delay on the part of the respondents to offer of possession of the allotted unit to the complainants as per the terms and conditions of the buyer's agreement dated Complaint No.

681 of Z0ZZ and ors.

53.

Page 20 of23 ffiHARERA ffianllGnnH,t 1,8.12.2014.

Accordingly, it is the failure of the responderrt/promoter to fulfil its obligations and responsibilities as per the agreement to hand over the possession within the stipulated period.

56.

Accordingly, the non-compliance of the mandate contained in section 11(a)[al read with section 1B(1) of the Act on the part of rhe respondent/promoter is established.

As such, the allottee shall be paid by the promoter interest for every month of delay from thre due date of possession i.e., 1,8.1,2.201,8 till the'date of valid offer of po:;session plus 2 months after obtaining occupation certificate from the competent authority or actual handing over of possession, whicheverr is earlier; at prescribed rate i.e., 11.'1,0o/o p.a. as per pioviso to section 1B(1) of the Act read with rule 15 of the rules.

G. rules.

G.III Direct the respondent to quash the one-sided clauses from developer buyer agreement.

57.

The respondent/promoter shall not charge anything from the complainant which is not the part of the BBA.

G.IV Pass an order for payment of GST amount levired upon the complainant and taken the benefit of input credit by builder.

58.

The complainant has sought the relief with regard to input tax credit to the complainants and charge the GST as per rules and regulations, the attention of the authority was drawn to the fact that the lelgislature while framing the GST law specifically provided for anti-profiteering measures as a check and to maintain the balance in the inflation of cost on the product/services due to change in migration to a new tax regime i.e.

GST, by incorporating section 1,71, in Central Goods and Services Tax Act, Complaint No.

681 of 2022 and OriS.

Page 2l of 23 ffiHARERA ffi, ouRUGRAM 2017 /Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act,zo17, the sa herein below. "Section 171. (1) Any reduction in rate of tox on any goods or services or the benefit of input tax credit shalt be on to the recipient by way of commensurote reduction in 59.

As per the above provision, the benefit of tax reduction or is required to be passed onto the customers in view HGST/CGST Act, 201.7. ln passed the benefit of ITC to provisions of sectio n lT l( to approach the proceedings under promoter.

H.

Directions of 60.

Hence, the authori directions under secti cast upon the promoter as under section 34[0 a.

The interest at the from due date of possession i.e., lB.tZ.ZOl,g till the possession plus 2 months after obtaining occupation the competent authority or actual handing over whichever is earlier; at prescribed rate i.e., lt.l}o/o to section 1B(1) of the Act read with rule 1.5 of the ru Complaint N '1. of 2022 and reproduced t Tax Credit' on 171 of r has not tion to the respondent/p the unit in con n entrusted 20t7. sted 20t7.

The al is at liberty H initiating inst respondent- issu following obligations e authority com are to pay eve th of delay valid offer of from possession, per proviso .t/ Page 22 of 23 HARERA GURUGRAM b.

The respondent no.

2 is directed to hand over possession of the unit to the complainants wi obtaining occupation certificate c.

The rate of interest chargeable from the allottees by case of default shall be charged at the prescribed rate respondent/promoter which is the same rate of i delayed possession d.

The complainants are di adjustment of in e.

The respondents 90 days from rules.

61,.

This decision shall this order.

62.

63.

The complaints stand di Files be consigned to registry. ( Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Dated: 21.02.2024 7 of 2022 and physical months after promoter, in L.LQo/o by the allottees, in case which the ult i.e., the n Z(za) of th outstanding if any, after within L6(2) of the in para 3 of Page23 of23