AJAY NARAIN GUPTA vs RAHEJA DEVELOPERS LTD.

ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM Mr.

Ajay Narain Gupta R/o: -House No.

19, Bahubali Enclave, Karkar Dooma, New Delhi- 1,L0092.

M/s Raheja Developers Regd.

Office at: W4D Kunj, Carippa M Sainik farms, N CORAM: Shri Samir Ku Shri Subhash APPEARANCE: Sh.

Harshit Batra None ORD E R.

1.

The present complaint dater:l 20'.02.2020 has complainant/allottee in form of CRA under s Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, the Act) read with rule 28 of the Harya [Regulation and Development) Rules, 201,7 Rules) for violation of section 1,1,(4)(a) of the Page 1 of 11 of 2020 Complaint no.

First date of hearing Date of decision for the te for th of 2020 .04.2020 LL.2020 plainant rpondent by the 31 of the fin short, Estate short, the rein it is ember ember Complainant Respondent HARERA GURUGl?AM inter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be all obligations, responsibilities and functio under the provisions of the Act or the rules made there under or to the allottee as per the sale executed inter se them. nsible for provided lations ment for 2.

The particulars of the project, the details of sal deration, the amount paid inant, proposed handing over the detailed in the foll period, if have been Complaint N of2020 co trY, and location ted 01.06.2011 1.05.2021 DTCP I status 49 ofZ valid u vide no.

32 of 04.o8.2017 5 Years revised the date of RERA registration valid up to r, Tower-B Unit no. . ft. [approx.) Unit measuring Page 2 of 11 S.No.

Heads Information L. "Raheja's "Revanta", Sector 78, Gurugram 2.

Project area 78.7213 acres 3.

Nature of the project Residential Group Housing Colony 4.

5.

Name of licensee Shil,Ram Chander, Ram SaWroop and 4 Others 6.

RERA Registere d/ not registered 7.

B.

9. ffi ffi wlE q!{ 3.

HARERA GURUGI?AM Complaint N .93 ) of 2020 10.

Date of execution of Agreement to Sell Raheja's Revanta 26.06.2 lPage 2 )L2 iof :omplaint] L]-.

Payment plan Installn [Page 6 ent )of payment Plan complaint] 12. laint] 12.

Total consideration as per annexure C-1, applicant ledger dated L9.72.20L9(Page L7 of complaint) and annexure R-22, applicant ledger dated 22.06.2020fPage 189 of reply) Rs.L,1B 72,( 32 /- 13.

Total amount paid by the complerinant as per annexure C-1, applicant ledger dated 1,9.12.201.9[Page L7 of complaint) ancl anne.Kure R-22, applicant [edger dated 22.06.2020(Page 1,89 of reply) Rs.1,07 :. )4,4 70/- 14.

Due dqte' T posses-slon Agreement months'$rd l^r^ ^d ---- - 25.1,2.21 16 ,.,1.1 ro Jerr Lfio rn :e period fro uaLe ul,exe( uLron (]r ag iEIII enf tn respect of "Surya tower' [Page 4,0 of complaint] 15.

Delay in handing over possession till date to till this order i.e. t2.tL.2020 3 years 0n Lonths and L7 days As per clause 4.2 of the agreement to sell Rahe possession was to be handed over by 48 mo period of 6 Months, from the date of agreemer out to be 26.12.2016.

Clause 4.2 of the agrer reproduced below. ,S s lvanta the rlus grace ich comes : to sell is 3 of11 ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRAM 4. within the time The complai signed on 2 950/o of the payment sch no default on and that the payments "4.2 Possession Time and Compensation That the Seller shall sincerely endeavour to give of the Unit of 'TAPAS' to the Purchaser within thirty-six (36) months in Independent Floors and Forty-eight (48) months of 'SURYA TOWER' from the date of the execution of the to sell and after providing of necessary infrostructure water in the sector by the government, but conditions or any Government/Regulatory inaction or omission However, the Seller beyond the of the Seller. .for free grace completed period of six (6) sell was L2 and the aina more than amouht per the t.

There is rega payments uly paid to ndent sewer & majeure action, n of the unts to witLrin time. lJo'rvevr:r., there is delay in co mentioned ptoject by the respondent breach of the terms and conditions of the Hence, this complaint inter alia for the followi t to sell. iefs: nt from i. nt from i.

To direct the respondent to provide plainant with prescribed rate of interest on delay possession on the amount paid by the co nding over Page 4 of 11 Complaint No.

930 of ?020 HARERA GUl?UGRAM 5.

6.

The respondent grounds: i.

The ii. the date of possession as per the bu actual possession; ii.

To direct the respondent to hand over the said unit at the earliesU On the date of hearing, the Authority respondent/promoter about the contraventi have been committed in relation to ed to the alleged to section L 1( of the Act following company goodwill, and has The prestigious Atharva', nt till to plead guilty or not to lSa compri always respondent has vered projects such as 'Raheja of these ifted after having taken possession and Resident Wel have been formed which are taking care day to day needs of the allottees of the respective The respondent submitted that the rject is one ionately of the most Iconic Skyscraper in the maki Page 5 of 11 complaint No.

930 of 2020 ffiHARERA ffi GURUGRAI,/ designed and executed project having tallest building in Haryana with highest i club in India.

The scale of the project req depth scientific study and analysis, be it wind tunnelling facade solutions, traffic management, environment optimization for and luxury and iconic and is the pool and a very in- e, fire, , services as well, together it a dream loper ali world's such ited with Petronas Tower in Saudi Khalifa, AS project for c best Jeddah( Arabia palace Abu iii.

The respor that ction of the tower in which the unit allotted to inant is located is75oh complete and the I hand over the possession of the same to the after its payment completion subject to the complainant ility of Dubai(presbntly tallest i in,the : Dhabi etc. of the due instalments amount and on Page 6 of 11 complaint No.

930 of 2020 ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRAM in iv. infrastructure facilities such as sector and laying providing basic external infrastructure such ', sgwgr, electricity etc. icity etc. as per terms of the applicati agreement to sell.

The respondent submitted that the e quality infrastructure (extemal) was required to to sustain an iconic internal infrastruc ilities for project requiring residents and possessl basic electri and se etc.

Keeping concei service cannot over 4000 for for of services fe quality lifts, waste t was & low rise belief that icence, the froads and customer made well external , water apartment blogkg jwith havingtire-aliled i! uii'th; government will construct and complete its basic infrastructure facilities on time. including the complainant was aware and cautious that the respondent cannot f cledr,,'water,i cbnti infrastructure as land acquisition for roads, PageT of11 Complaint No.

930 of 2020 ffiHARERA ffiGURUGRAM the sell o bound caused 7.

B. submissions made, and the documents filed by 8of11 respondent.

Therefore, as an abundant ion. the respondent company while hedging the offered made an honest disclosure in the itself in Clause no.

5 of the terms and condi v.

The respondent further submitted that Allotment mplainant letter dated 26. apartment no.

B- th floor, in T B, Raheja total sale sq. ft. conside that nt to to be ', the delay the of the respondent reply. dismissed and electricity supply is beyond the lotted to Revanta a of the on price on form at the very threshold.

Copies of all the relevzrnt documents have placed on the record.

Their authenticity is Hence, the complaint can be decided on the filed and n dispute. undisputed documents and submission made of these parties.

The Authority on the basis of information, exp other rties is of Complaint N signed and.ex vi. ffiHARERA ffi.-GURUGRAM 9.

10.

Ltd,leaving aside com adjudicating officer if stage.

On considerati both the pa Act, the A contraventio agreement to possession of the 11.

Complaint N considered view that there is no need of furth complaint.

Arguments heard. nts heard.

The authority has complete jurisdiction complaint regarding non-compliance of obli ring in the ecide the ns by the 17 dated of revised promoter as held in Simmi Sikka v/s M/s MGF Land ich is to be by the the compla t at a later made by ns of the tisin virtue of 6.06.201.2, within stipulated time i.e,. by 2A;i.iO!zO of6 monrhs. rherefolf, l??;"4"?,dlte: ot !,114ine o ii'a- I comes out to"'be26.1,2.2015.

The Authority possession despite the lapse of due date, no offer of pos n has been given nor any occupation certificate has been respondent.

Registration certificate No.32 4.8.2017 was valid for five years from the environment clearance.

Since the project is ved by the plete, it Page 9 of 11 ffi ffi wt! qqd HARERA GURUGl?AM period.

Acco contained respondent to delay i.e.

9.30% p.a. direly needs essential of registration notice under section 59 for violation of Section ibid be issued by the Planning branch on renewal of the RERA registration certificate.

T been delivered to the complainant till date, the well within his right to get delayed p Accordingly, it is the respond obligations, responsibil the agreem 26.06.2012 to hand over n withi r which a of the Act nt of non- nit has not ainant is charges. fulfil his sell dated stipulated mandate of section 1B(1) of the Act reacl with rules 15 of 1,2.

Hence, the Authority hereby passe,l this,or,de J following directioris under sedtion 34(t) of the (i) The respondent is directed to pay i prescribed rate of 9.300/o p.a. for every from the due date of possession i.e. physical possession o of the is entitled of interest the actual unit as per e proviso to les. issue the t at the of delay Complaint th tt(4)(a) of the handing over the actual physical possessi 016 till Fage 10 of 11 ffiHARERA S-GuRUGRAM File be consigned to reg Member, ,'*\ I iii*'i Haryana'R,q*6I Esldd- [ii) The complainant is directed to pay o any, after adjustment of interest for the (iii) The respondent is directed to pay interes 26.06. res 26.06.2016 till the date of this order ro within 90 days from the date of decision interest to be paid by the 1Oth of each s [iv) The respondent complainant which (v) Interest on promo is the compla Complaint sta 13.

14.

Dated:25.09.2020 of, e of the flat the co @ ng dues, if period; from mplainant month; from the by the ted to the complaint No.

930 of 2020 (Subhash Chander Kush) Page 11 of 11 Judgement Uploaded on 01.12.2020.