MR KARAN SINGH vs DESI CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED

HARERA GURUGRA[/ BEFORE THE ComplaintNo.

4346oi2024 HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGUUTTORYAUTHORITY, CURUGRAM Dateofdecision: 27.05.202s s. -; cR/4341/2024 aR/4tta/2024 NAMI] OT I'HI I]UILDER Desi Construction Privatc Limiied. "TATHASTUJI", Sector- S, Gutu8Em, Haryana aR/4346/2024 cF/4153/2024 A.oop Xumar Praiapatiand Pi*ini V€rma Desi Coostruction Privale Limired [R1l , JtateBankorIidiu(R2l v/s Des Construction Prj!al.

Limit.d (R1) s!a!e Ba.Ioi]ndia IR2] Shubham BadhJna Desi constru.tion Privat.

Limired (R1l stare Bankoflndia (R2) Deve.dE Badhana v/s DesL Construcnon Privat. l,imiied (R1l state Bankoflndia (R2) DosL Constructroi l'rjvit. l,inrit.d (Rl l SutcBrnkoilnd (R2) laebi.

SinBh Tanwar Desi Construction Private l,imited (R1l state Bank oflndia (R2l (R/ 4160 / 2024 CR/4362/2024 Dharhender(umardndYogrtaChauhan I vls i D.5iLonsrrucr'on Pnvate Umited (R1) I srrrF Brnknf rnd'r fn?l cR/44t4/2424 NitinM€hta v/s Desi Consrruction Private Limited (R1l cR/4464/2424 2 3 I HARERA GURi]GRA[/ Complaint No, 4346 of 2024 Construction Private Limited (R1) State Bank oirndia (R2l laR/4343/2A24 Construdion Private Limited CORAM: ShriVijay Kunrar Goyal ShriAshok Sangwan APPEARANCEI Sh.

Rishabh Gupta [Advocate] from S.

Sh.

Rajan Hans (Advocaiel from S.

No.

Rahul luangla (Advocate) sh Sanjeev Saear (Advocate) No.1 to 9 10 Complainant(sl l 2 ORDER This order shalldispose ol10 complaints titled above filed before this authority Lnder \ectron rl or rhe Rerl E<rare tRegulation and DevelopmenllAfl.20lb (hereinnfter referred as the Act") read with rule28 ofthe Haryana RealEstate (Regulationand Development) Rules,2017 (hereinafter relerredas "the rules"l lor v,olation ofsection 11(4Xa) ofthe Act wherein itisinteralia prescribed that thc p.omoter shall be responsjble for all its obliSations, responsibilities and tunctronstothe allottees as per the agreement for sale executed inter se parties. 'l'he core ismes . re ismes .manating from then are srmrlar in nature and the conrplainant[, in the above referred matters are allottees of the project, n:rmely, Tathastu- II", Sector'5, Gurugram, Haryana beiDg developed by the respondent/promoter i.e., [4/s D.si construction Private l,imited.

The terms and conditions ofdre allotment letter, buye/s agreemen ts, lulcru m ofthe issue involved jn all these cases pertains to failure on the part oa the promoter to *HARERA d$- crnrrcnlrtt Proi€ct Name and Location Complaint No.

4345 o12024 'Tarl rstu.ll rrSe.tor5 Curueram Atlordable sroup housinE colony r88 0f2022 darcd 061r 2022 l..e.see- Desi aorstru.rion Pvt l,td 23412023 (As inlormation obrrined from the planninBbraochl [As iiformatioi obtaired lron] the plannjnsbran.h) deliver timely possession of the units in question seeking award ofpossession and delayed possession charges and execute the conveyance deed and others.

The details ofthecomplaints, unit no-, dateofagreement, possession clause, due date olpossession, total sale consideratio[ totalpaid amount and relief sought aregiven in the table belowr DTCP license no, and other Ruildms Dlan rDFroval d!trd E vironmentclearance dated RERA Regist€red/ nor 21of202?aarcd lonl2023 Posesion clause as oerbuyef s Possession claus€ as per Affordable Housina Poli.y, 201 3 ''7-1 schedute Ior posyssion ofthe soi.t Pto4 untt/ Apantnert lor Rstdentiot/ connerciot/ tndNno t/ 1T/ uny other tsoge .

The Prcnater ogrees onl unde,ttonds that tinely tleliverr ol posqsioh ol th.

Plor/ unn/ Aputnenllar Residenaol/ conncrcnl/ tndunriul/ 11/ ohy ather utoge (os the cae nor be) aton! |/ith patkins (ifapphcabte) to the Atloueets) and the comnon ures to the o$ociotian of allattees ot the cohpet t authoriE, os the case nor be, os provdcd undet Rule 2(rA ol Rules, 2a17, ts the e se n ce af t h e Asreement". lttvl of the Atror.loble Eounns Policy,2o13 All such projects shall be required to be necessonly conpleted within 4 yeols lrcn th. s lrcn th. dq@wl ol buikling plons or gront ol qvituhhqtal cledrun e, whichev* is loteL This date sholl be refered ta as the dote olconnercenent olprctect" lot the putpoe of thk poli.!.

The licenses sho not be renewed belond the sdid 4 Jea.s petiod ltoft the dote nl.am nen re nent ol prote.

L lrHARERA *db- cuqrrGRAM Complaint No, 43,16 of 2024 ,r,r.r/;, 1.aL(ulakdrrom HARERA Complainr No.

4346of 2024 HARERA GURUGRAI/ ComplaintNo,4346of 2024 GURUGRAIV HARERA ComplaintNo.4346of 2024 ti, &-u HARERA GURUGRANI I --- T-o"g.u.r I I I I rorvr Reliefsought by the onplainantsI 1 Dircct the .espondent not ro .rca!e any thlrd party .jghrs tilt flnaL conplerion of the 2 Dir.c! th. rospondeDt to restore the unir ro jts original.umberand jssuedemand as per thebuilderbuyeragrcement :l 0r wirh aiy other reLrelwhich tLis ^urhorit, mar dech Jit, may kindly be pas 'n tuvour ot.omlltrjnrnt and against !he respo.dent Reply re.eiv.d by the rcsrond.nr amount paid by th. aro@./s 1 1'he facts ofallthe complaints filed by the complajnan(s)/allortee(, are similir out of the alrove-mentioned case, the particulars of lead case CR/4346/2024 titled as Anoop Kumar Prajapati ol.l Rogini Verma Vs.

M/s Desi Construction Pvt.

Ltd.and others- are being taken into consideration fbr determrnrng (he rights olthe allottee(s).

Proiect and unit related details Th. particulam olthe prolect. the detajls olsale considcration, rhe amount pirid by the co m plaina nt, date o f p roposed h anding over th e possess ion, delay period, jt. y, have been detailcd in the following tirbular lorm: CR/4346/2024 titled os Anoop Kunar Praiapatidnd Ragini verma vs.

Ltd.ond others ,N- rtt complaintNo.4346of 2024 I2.

I Project location Sector-05, Sohna, curgaon, Harvana f: TN"t,,* "rP-t".t a.

I Area of Project 8975 acres Housing Policy PLIARER4 -s-qtntnnav Complaint No.

4346oi2024 022 dated 6.71_2022 to 15.17.2027 v!l!{!I RERA regisrratron 21 of2023 dated 30.01.2023 y4idup ro 14.11. ro 14.11.2027 laint) T6-404, Floor'4,h 645 818 sq. ft.

IPage 27 oicomp]aint) 19.04.202 3 Page 29 of compl.r'n!l Plot/ Unit/ Aportnent Jor Resden ot/ Comnerciol/ lndustriol/ tT/ ont other The Pronoter ogrces ond 7.1 khedule lor ?o5seseon oJ the \dirt essen ce of th e Aatee ne ht). uk.lentahds that timel! .lelivery .f passessiol of the !,lot/ Unn/ Apaftncnt t'ot Reside tiol/ Connerciol/ thdu*riot/ t'l/ ony othet usase (as the case moy be)olon! wnh parkt4g (il applicable) ta the Allottee(s) ond the catuhon oteos ta the asso.nltian of albttees ar the conryeLe t authar)ty, os the cose ma! be, os ptuv 1td under Rule 2(1)(l) of Rules, 2017, is the 1(tv) ofthe Allotdobte Housins Poticy, 201 3 All tlLh ptoje.ts shaL h. requited k, be neees\otit! .onpletetl wtth t I yeors lron the opproval oJ buildinq ptons or sraat ol enviroawntal cldron.e tuhi.h.v.r k lor.r Thit dote shall be .efered ta as the "da@ .J connencenent of prciect" lor the purpase af this polic!.

The lic.ns.s shdl not be renewed beyond the eid 4 ya6 penod fron the date of connficeneht of project Date Date of environment 09.02.2021 obtained trom the 24 0420?3 14.

4lqoipossession 09.02.2027 8. t ( 13 trHAREIA --@-atntnnnv 09 02.2021bernelatcr) Rr t5,57 6A6/- 6.

Rs.9.61,-7 l5 / - tompldint No 4346 of2024 (Note: calculated from the date of e.vironment clearance dated (As alleged by the complainant at pase 16 olcomplaintl 22.0320)4 Newspaper publication Reminder/ Demand letter (Page 78 ofcomplaint Pase 113 ofcomplaint) t5 _a3.2024, 26.0 4 _2A24, 29.05 2024 18.

I 0 0 0 reply filed by respondent 24 24 2 2 a 05.08. (Pase tl d Occupation Certiffcate (Page 21ofreply uled byrespondent 1t_ B.

Facis ofthe complaint Thc complainants have madethe following submissio ns in the complaint: l. lhatthe respondent had advertised about the,r Aifordable Housingproject under name and style 'TATHASTU Il" situated in revenue estate ofVjlla8e Sohna, Scctor- 5 'l'ehsil Sohna. sil Sohna.

Curugram alleging to be consisting of nrany advance technologies and amenities/infrastructures.

Pursuant to the hcrative oller and strong market hold of the .espondent, the complainant had shown interest in the said p.otect and agrecd to purchase a flat in the said Project.

The said project is also registered belore this Authority vide registration no.

21 ofdated 31.1 2023.

The registrat,on shall be valid fron a period commencing from 30.07-2023 tll74.11-2027 - Il.

That the .espondent company had invited application ior booking in its Afiordable Houring Project.rnd vlde application no.

T2APP /a7262/23.24 #HAREIA P* GURUGRAN/ tlt tv d ated 2 4.04.2 02 3, the complainant applied lor booking of the flat.

The draw was conducted in presence ofofficials ofAuthority consrituted by State ot Haryana lvherein the complainant was successfully allottee on the said 'l'hat the allotment letter dated 24.04.2023 was issued by the respondenr company.rlleging dre apartrnent bearing no.

T-6,404, having carpet ar.a 645.818 sq. feet on 4th noor in torve. no.- T-6, arthe rate ol Rs.3800/- per sq. feet ns basjc sale price and balcony area of 78.254l- sq. feet at rhe rate oi Rs.l000/ pe. sq. feel for the total sale consideration amounting to Rs.25,57,686/- ( excluding taxes and other.hargesJ.

That the builder buyer agreement was got executed and registered on 19.5.2023 between the parties alleging rhe flat no.

T-6,404.

The complainant paid total Rs9,61,715l- ( irom his pocketl (lncludins all Covernment taxes and charges as and lvhen demanded by the .espondcnt companyl.

The Total sale cons,deration price of the said unrt is Rs.25,57,686/' (excludingtaxes only).

The remainingamountto be paid by the complainant as per annexure ' B of the agreement mentioned at page no.

25 olthe agreement. agreement. 'Ihat jt should not be out to mention herein that with the expectation ol timely delivery oipossession ofthe said nat, the complainant has obtained loan agarnst the snid unit under which the State Bank of India has sanctjoned loan of Rs.18,00,000/- and ncxt installnrent dated 16.3.2024 ivas ro b. paid by tbe Bank on behaliof complainant to respondent no.

1 in lieu oipurchase olsaid un,t.

That it has been specifically mentioned in clause 1.4 at page 6 of the agreement that "The allottee shall make the payment as per the payment plan set out in Schedule B (payment planl.

As per clause 1.10 of the ComplarnrNo 4346of 2024 vt HARER GURUGRA[/ ComplalntNo.4346012024 VII vIl lx agreement it has been specificauy mentioned that 'U.

The balonce 75ak amount ol the flat cast will be recovercd as pet the stages ofconstuction to be prescribed in Schedule B'.

Thatthe as per clause no.7.1ofthe builderbuyer agreement,the possession was to be handed over as per prescribed under rule 2 (1) (D ofRules 2017. 'lhus, keeping in view the HRER registration certificate, the possession to th. complainant was to be handed over on or beiore 14.11.2027, and also as pe. builder buyer aSreemeDt.

Thatthe project TATHASTU -11",contain in all 6 towers out of wh,ch Tower' 3 has been constructed up to 14,h floor Superstructure and Tower-4 has been constructed up to 15t floor Superstructure.

The said level oi consbuction has also been conffrmed by the Eank Inspection report dated 14.08.2024 but there is no construction/deltlopment in Tower-6 as per site visit by the complainant.

The said construction was not completed when thc demand was rajsed rnther it was completed after raising the demand.

As per Bank inspection report dated 01.05.2024, Tower - 3 ilas constructed up to 5th slab and Tower4 - was constructed up to 5s slab but there w.rs no construction in Tower- 6 as persuch report.

That olficials of the bank as well as complainant visited the spite/spot ('he. spot ('he.e he was shocked to see that construction has been stopped by the respon.lent company and by stretch of imagination there is no hope for completion of prolect for the n.xt 7-9 years.

The respondent company is bent upon to dcmand the outstandjng money fronr the complainant which rs illegal, vague and unjustified jn the eye of law The construction of the project has been halted in Tower 6and the respondent is demaDding the amount nrore than the construction done.

This act and conduct of the respondetrt company shows thrt nrajor deilciency ofthe service and unfair ComplaintNo.4346of 2024 |]ABE!A GURUGRA[/ trade prnctice opted to make foolofthe gullible customers by delaying the construction of the project. 'l'hatthe respo ndent issued demand letter dated 16.03.2024 fo. an amount ofRs.3,19,711l-on the slab ofcompletion 1/3rd olsuperstructure.

There is no construction status specifically on Tower 6 till this dab and the respondent has issued illeg.rl and indefinite demand against the complainant which is liable tobesetaside. 'rhat the complainant had obtained loan to purchase the said flat and to make timely payment wirh the intention to get timely delivery of possession.

0n demand letter dated 16.032024 issued by respondent company, the comf lainaDt wrotean enuil dated 05.04.2024to hjs Bank tor disbursement ol outstanding payment of Rs.3,19,711l- wherein the Bank has denied vide email dated 5.4.2024, to disburse the amount with the reasons as With Reference to the trail, $/e have to advice that the Payment ofdem.tnd rn,sed by the Builder cannot be done as.onstructron is not done as per demand.

One otour omcer visited the site and submitted the report on 28.3.2024 that construction oiTower 6 is foundation level but it should bc 7, , Slab. ' The reply received fro m Bank has aiso been fo rwarded by the complainant to thc respondent company on 05.04.2024.

1he compla'naDt also wrote an enraildated 05.04. ted 05.04.2024 to his Bank to disbursethe amount as per the demand raised by the respondent company for which Bank has completely denied showing no construction done on part or respondent company at that level.

Thus, there is no malafide intention of the complainant for paying any outstanding amount but it is the respondent company rlho had lailed to performance its part of coDtract by adhering terms oi Builder Buyer Agreement as well as Affordable Housing Schem.

2013 in demandine paynlent from the conrplainant and taking undue x XI I HARERH GURUGRAN/ xTt advantage ofescalation in price at the said area, is bent upon to cancelthe unit arbin ary an.l unilaterally on the ground oinonpayment oioutstanding dues aDd is threatening to create third party right in the said unit.

This act and conduct oithe respondent company shows that major deficie.cy olthe service and unfair trade practice opted to make fool of the gullible customers by delaying the.onstrrction of the proiect.

That the complaiDant is/has nlways been ready and willing to perform his part olcoDnact as perterms ofthe Builder Buyer agreement butitwas the respondent company who has failed to perform its part of contact by not constructing the towe.- I at desired leveland raising demand ofthat level of construction illegal, and arbitrary.

The said denrand raised by the respondent company,s agarnst the principle of natu ral justi€e and against the law and facts.

The complain:nt has sumcient lunds to pat, the outstanding arnount but thc rcspondcDt has not constructed the tower at that level as mentioned in Schedule B of payment plan oi builder buyer agreement.

There is no deiault in payment to be paid by the complainant and the rcspondent company has notcompeied the project as per stipulated time mentioned rrr th€ builder buyer agreement and as pe. atTordable housing schcme 2013. hcme 2013.

That the demand raised by the respondent company is completely vague, illegal and not as per the level ol construction but being in a dominant position, the respondent conprny ir beDt upon to cancel the unit and relunding the anrount to the other allottees.

The builder buyer agreement is registered document befbre the Sub- Registrar ofthe concerned aren and it cannol be cancelled without cancelling the said ag.eement.

The said agreenrent can only be cancelled by civil court only.

The complainant is s.ekins possession of the unit with a dream to have one resrdential xI t.

Complaint No.4346oi2024 C.m.L3rniNo 4146.f 7o74 XIV c.

7. completion ofp.oject.

11.

Direct the respondent to restor€ the unit to its original number and issue demand as perthe builder buyer agreement. lll.

0r with any other relief which this Author,ty may deern fit, may kindly be pass in lavour o t complainan t and against the respondent.

8.

On the date of hearins, the authority explained to the respondent/ promoter about the contraventions as alleged to have been committed in re)ation to section 11[4] [a] oithe act to plead gu,lty or not to plead guilty.

D.

Reply by the respondents D.l Replybyrespondentno.l Reliefsought by the complainantsr - 'lhe complninnnts have sought following relief[s): l.

DifcctiDg the rcstond.nt not to create any third party rights till tinal *HARERA GURUGRAIV property at city Gurugram but the act and conduct of rhe respondent company 's completely against the ternrs and condition of the agreement and affordable housins schemc 2013.

That the respondent has failed to fulfill jts obligations as under builder buyer agreement and it is clear cut case of abuse of their dominant position ol the respondent in the market and such an act needs to be penalized againstthe respondent.

Tbat the complainant had also wrote to Bank ior not canceling the loan sanctjon in purchase ol said unit and not to surrender the unit to the builde./respondentno. pondentno.l Thecomplainantaiterexhaustingallherpatience had lastly contactcd to the respondent representative to set aside the said canc.llation le$er dated 13.08.2024 and restore the unit to its original number but no aruitful nnswer has been replibd by the respondent and its oaficials.

Hence, the cause ofaction has arose to the complainant ro file the present conlplaint before this Aurhoriry.

Complaint No.

4346of 2024 HARERA respondent no.

1 is contesting the complaint on the lollowing grounds: Thatthepresentconrplaint in the presentfo.m is not be maintainable as the same is contrary to the provisjon of the Act, 2016 and the Rules, 2017 and therefore, the p resent complaint isliable tobedismissedin limine.Thatthis Authority does not have the lurisdictioD and adjudicate the present complaint.

Therelore, the present complaint is liable to be dismissed.

That dre Complainant is guilty of not making the payments of due installments on time and therefore, the complainant is not entitled to seek the reliefto set aside the cancellatjon letter senr by emaildated 13.08.2024 and restor.rtion ol the sublect unit to its original number rather the complainant are liable to pay the interest and damages to lhe respondent.

That the complainant, in the present matte., had failed to make timely payments and dlcre were substa ntial delays in making the payments of the due instirllment against th.

Intimation cum demand letter dated 15.03.2024. tvloreover, the respondent had issued mukiple.eminders on 2A.04.2A24 and 23.05.2024 aga,nst the outstanding due installme.ts to the complainant but the conrplainant had railed to make timely payments oflhe due installments.

Subsequently, the respondent had issued afinal.eminder cum cancellation notice on 05.08.2024 alt€r the publication of a public notice jn the newspaper 'Puniab Kesad' on 05.08.2024 by the respoDd.nt/promoter seeking lhe payment of the due installments from the comlrainant Consequenily, the respondent /promoter had issued il c. sued il c.tncellation letter againstthe subject flat no.

T6 404, on 4th floor, Tower- T-6 in th€ project lathastu II, situated in the revenue estate ol village SohDa, Gurugram, Haryana, to the complainantvide emarldated 13.08 2024 ,s per the nrutually agreed tcnns and conditions oithe registered buiLder Complaint No.,{346 of 2024 GURUGRA[/ ,r ,rREli buyer asreement/ agreement for saledated 19.05.2023 and theAffordable Housing Policy, 2013.

That the respondent no.

2 has no authority to inspect the proiect site ofthe respondent.

The respondent no.

2 i.e., Bank/nnancial institute has played mischiel to let the complaiDant to deiault in mak,ng the payment of sale consideralion on the ialsc aDd hivolous grounds.

The respondent rs constructrng tbe site as per the law and commitments made to the entire public at large.

Apartfrom that thisAuthority is empowered to monitor the construction and progress over the project site olthe respondent/builder fromtimeto timeand thcrc have been nolapseand other lacunas have been identified by this Authority with .egard to theconstruction status ofthe said project.llence, the complainant andthe respoildent no 2 in connivanc€ and collusion ivith each other did not made the payment of sale consideration as demanded vid.lntimrtion cunr demand letterdated 15.03.2024 That thc respondentno 2 i.e., Bankas lvellas the other public sector banks h.rve also finan.ed various other units/flats ln the said project and have dulydisbu.sed the due installm€nts amountas and when demanded by ihe respondcnt/promoter.

Ihe said banks along lvith allottees /buyers of the sard units have duly satisfied and honored the demand letter of the respondent/pronroter as and lvhen demanded and have paid the sale consideration on time.

That the time is essence of the contract and as per the burlder buycr agreement executed behveen the parties; the complainant has not complied with the lerms oi the builder buyer agreenreDt as well as the trip. the trip.rrtite agreement executed between the complainant and both respondents.

As a result, the builder was compelled to cancel the allotment of the conlplain:nr's ilat under the Affordable Housing Policy,2013, due to the complainant's consistent delault s.

D.II EABEBA GUl?UGRA[/ That the cor differentiatjng Housing Policy 2013 due to th That in case tt payment plan payment plnn, compeuing c Reply by rel romplainant js unfau and m,sleading this Authority by ng thc project in towerivise base proiect.

As per theAfibrdable icy, 2013 and the re8ulations ofthis Autho.ity as well as per the r agreemenr fo. sale dated 19.05.2023, the builder/respondent ) demand f,orthe sale consideratio n as peragreed payment plan re denland upon construction of 1/3rd olthe superst.ucture of ,roject.

Hence, the plea /avernents of the complainant with ,wer wise payment is barred, baseless and unfounded.

Further, nt case, the said ilat/unit ofthe complainant was cancelled vide d 13.0U 202.1 in accoftlance of the Affordable Housing Policy, ) thc deiaLrlt ofthe complainant, in payiDg the sale consider.rtion ce and collusion with the respondentno.2. r the complainant/alLotee obtains loan facility, the complaiDant obligated to get the loan disbursed as per the developers lan and to make payment oi the due installments as per the nn, rn case ofanydelayin disbursement bythe Bank due to any rtsoever.

Therefore, the cornplaiDant has not complied with the ," burldcr buyer agrecnrent 3s w€ll as the tripartite agrcemcnt etween the complain.rnt aDd both respondents and due to the circumstances, thc builder/ answering respondent w3s I to cancel the allotment ol the complainanfs flat under thc Housing Policy,2013. use of action arises in iavour of the complai.ants as alleged he present complaint and thereiore, the present complaint is dismissed for the lack olcause ofaction as alleged herein. respondent no.2 i.e., Bank :no.2 is contestins the conrplaint on the followi ng groundsl ComplaintNo. mplaintNo.4346o12024 ll) ,*(T' II on completion ofsupqr structu.e That the respondent no.

2 is the bank which has provided the loan to the complainant against the residential accommodation which is to be constructed by respondent no.1.

The loan was provided by the bank after the execution of, tripartite agreement.

That th€ payment schedule ofthe builder mentioned that the payments are to be made partiallyas per the payment plan and the respondenr no.

2/bank had agreed to pay ,n the same manner.

According to the agreement the payment plan was as follows: ComplaintNo.4346oI2024 I At the time ofbookjng Installmcnt to be paid 20% ol Toral Unir cost = At the time ofallotlrq4 lr,5%orTotalunirCost 4 on Lunrplcrron of l/ld of super 12.50/0 olTotal unit Cost On completion of 2/3'd super l2 5ol. olTotal UnrtCost 5 7 Ar the tinre olFinishrn !r l)r r)ln,r rrr l).\sfssit) l It tv.

The loan amount of Rs.18,00,000/_ ivas sanctioned through final sanction letter loan account against dte nat no.

404 Tower T_6, 4th floor, rn the proj.ct namely, 'Tathastu II" situated in sector 5, sohna Gurgaon vide sancrion lcrter dried 25.03.2024.

Thlt the .cspondcnt no.

1 vnic dcmand letter dated 1'1.03.2024 demanded payment lor havinS rea.hed a specilic construction level.

The respondent bank however did not disburse the amount demanded in demand letter dated 1.1.03.2024 by the respondent no.1.

The respondent no. z/bank denred th. disbursement ol anrount vid. email dated 04.04 2024 to lhe complarn r n t beca use the res pon dent n o 1 had raised fake demand srnce thc construction was Dot yet completcd as per the required payment Plan by 11.590 ofT,,trl un,t Cosr 10%ofTotalUnit Cost I I, E.

1?

13.

PLIARENA *@- GURUGRAM complaint No.

4346 of2024 the respondent no.l in the respectivc iowerT 2 where the complainanthas the property.

The bank has also shared the photographs and the site report with the complainants. v That the bank has also conveyed to the .espondent no. ondent no.1 on email that the complainants are n ot wanting ca ncellation ofthe flat and thus the allotment should not be cancelled, and the loan account cannot be closed.

Thc bank has done scveral commu nication with the respondeDt no.

1/bu ilder a nd the V1 That the cause ol action ol the respon.l.nt no I for issuance of denland l.tter, cancelling the allotment otthe complainant fo. not making payment olthe demanded amount not actually due is illegaland thus the appropriate orders are required tobe passed against the respondent no.2.

Copies ofa1l the relevant documents have been filed and placed on the record. 'lheir authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the cor4plaint can be decided on the basis ofthese undisputed documentsand submission madebythe parties lurisdiction of the authority Thr authority obseNes that rt has territorial as well as subject matter ludsdiction to adjudicate the p resent complaint for the reasons gjven below E.l TerritorialiurisdictioD As per notjficntion no. l/9212017-lTCP dated 14,12.20I7 issued by Town and Country Plannnrg Department, the jurisdiction ol Real Estate Regulatorv Authority, Curugran shall be entire Curugram District for all purpose with ofliccs situated in Gurugram.

In thc Present case, the project in question is sihrated within the planning area ofCurugram District.

Therefore, this authoritv hrs.onrplete territorinljunsdictbn to dealtlith the P resent complain t.

E,ll Subje.t maner iu.isdi.tion M IARER'.

ComplaintNo.4346of 2024 GURUGRAIV lltaltal orthe Act,2016 provides that the promoter shallbe responsible to the allottee as per agreement for sale section 11(4)(a) is reproduced as l5 17 'tit , r" ,,"."n, .,,o,, (a) be respansible fo. ott obtigotians, rcsponebthties uhd lunctions un.!e. the Pravisians af thk A.t ot rhe tules and resulotians node the.euntle. ot to the ollattces os pe. ces os pe. the ogreanent far sole, ar to the o$ociationolallone6, os the rose no! be,ttll the conretonce ofoll thc a?orttnents, plots ot build inss, ds the cae no! be, to the ollotteet ot the connan a.cos to the ult\.idtio oloIIouees o. the.anPetent outhoritr, ds the case nut' be: Se. ti on 3 4.

F u n etion s of he Authority : 31U) of the Att pravides to ensute.onPtiance al the obligations cost wan thc p.anatert the allattees ohti the teolestote asents u.derthk ALtond the rutes ,nll tesulatians nodethercunde.

So in view olthe provisions ofthe Act quoted above, the authority has complete iunsdiclion to decjde the complaint regardiDg non'compl,ance olobligaiions by thc promoter leaving aside conrpe.sation which is to be decided by the adludicatin8 officer ifpursued by the complainants at a later stage Findings or the relief sought by the complainants.

F,l Directing the respondent not to create any third party riShts till fi,tal completion orproiecL F.ll Direct the respondentto r€sto.e tlle unitto its origlnal number and lssue demand as per the bullder buyc.agreement 'llre above-sousht relief(s) by the conplainants are taken together being inter 'l'he complainants have submjtted that they were alloited a flat bearing no.

T6 40.1, 4,f Floor, in TowerT6, measuring 645.818 sq. ft. and balcony area 78.254 sq. ft. in the Affordable Croup Housing Project oi the resPondent named ''IATHASTU 1 l" at ViUage Soh na, Sector'5, G urugranr vide nllotmeDt letter dated 24 04.2023.

Thereafter, an apartmenl buycr agreement dated 19.05.2023 was also executed between the parties regarding the said allotment for a sale I t,f Complaint No- 4346 of 2024 consideration oa Rs.25,s7,686/'. l\s per clause 1(ivl of the Affordable Housing Policy, 2013 it is prescribed that ",411 suci projects sholl be required to be necessdrily completed within 4 yeors fron the date ofapproval ol building plans ar grant oI environmental clearance, whichever is Iater'This dote shall be relefted ta as the "dote ol ca dote ol canmencernent af t o)cct for the purPose of this policy 'lhe respondent has obtained environment clearance and buildinE plan approval in respect ol the said project an 09.02.2023 and 23.01.2023 respectivelv.

Therefore, the due date oa possession is be,ng calculated from the date of environmental clearance, being later.

Thereiore, the due date oi possessioD conles out to be 09.02.2027.

Lu.

Thereafter, the complainants and the respondent no.2 signed an /6REEME I LDTThR Home Loon-HL FOR INDIVIDUALS, on 27.b3.2024 and a home loan to the tune of Rs.18,00,000/- was s.rnctioned.

The complainants have paid an anroLrnt of Rs.9,61,715l- till 28.08.2023 against th€ agreed sale consideration Fu(h.r, the respondent no.1 demanded payments without anv justification, ovrr and above the agreed amount oi total sale cons,deration.

The respondent/pronroier has issued demand letter dated 15.03.2024, which was payable on o. beiore 06 04.2024. l hereafter, on 20.042024 and 23 05-2a24 the respondent no.1 issued reminder l€tters to pay the outstanding dues on or betore 26.04.2024 a 29.05.2024 respect,vely.

Further, on 05.08.2024 the respondent no.

1 plrbhshed a dctaulter's list in a newsPaper namely Punjab Kcsari inclusive ofallottee/complajnrnt's name (Mr.

Anoop Kumar Prajapatilin it.

19.

1he respondent no.

1 i.e., promoter has submitted that as per agreed paynrent s.hedule. it has sent the demnnd and reminder letters dated 15.03.2024, dcmandingan amount oiRs.3,19,711l underthehead'On camplenon ol 1/3d al super structurc funn cost ond Bolcony)" against the sublect unit.

Further the HARERA Complaint No.

43{6 of 2024 P- GURUGRAIV respondent submitted that all the 8 towcrs present in the project along with super structure are conrpleted. l he respondeni no.1 sent the reminder letters on 20.04.2021 and 23.05.2a2+ and cancellation letter dated 05 08 2024, on account ofnon payment. n payment.

Further, only SBI, Badshahpur branch has refused the complainants to release their loan othcNvise the other branch ofSBI and other flnancial institutions are releasing the loan to the other allottees of the said prolect.

Finally, the respondent no 1 published the noticc ofcancellation due to nof comphancc/default in the daily newsPaPer "Punjab Kesari"'as per the guidelines und.r the Allordable llousing Policy 2013, Haryana.

The respondeDt no.

2 i.e., has submitted that the respondent no.

1 vide demand lctter dated 14.03.2024 d€manded payment for having reached a specific construction level.

The respoodent bank however did not disburse the arnount derlanded in demand letter dated 14.03.2024 by the respondent no1.

2/bank denied the disbursement of amount vide email dated 0,104 2024 to the complainants becausethe respondent no.1 had raised demand bul the construction was not yet completed as per the agreed Pavment plan bir th. respondent no i Ln thc respe.tive tower T 2 where the unit oI the complainanls was situated.

Ihe bank also conveyed to the .espondeDt no.1 vra c'ftiil dated 04.04.2024 that the complainants want to retain their allotntent arrd thus their allotment should notbe cancelled, f,urther requesting the bank not to close then loan l.count.

The bank did several communications with the respondent no l/builder and the complainants.

The bank also shared the photographs and site reportwith the complsinants as wellas the.espondent no 1/promoter which is mentioned below for ready reference: INSPECI'ON RIPORTAF PRA]EC'I - TA|HAS'TIJ II AA6807 BEs7 SKY TOWER.

NSP PITA PUM, DELHI Re s 6 te t 4tr!!!9!!!-l!!j!!e! &HARERA *&-cLrnrrcnlM lr:n iRERArir- ComplaintNo.4346of 2024 M/S DESI CONSTRL]CTION PM LIM|TED RC / RE P/ HAREM/G4 M / 688/409 /2 02 3 /2 1 Lun lnspecion 4ote &detoils Nane ol ete contoct peBon wthl I Ptephon. iunbe,.adeesnotioi I lrrlddr:rs a5 HA k S I N A h A 1.9 2 0 s 5s4 AA 2 I !.!!!!!!4 T.*, C.t/S Lft2 NO tlL NO "!!4 C l. "!!4 C l./S LT+21 14.11.2027 15 no So- L .\r t|".Jdtaa y.,tg t:rFPptolc-$) n -i't w*a p'"o,"ss "t tt"\ o-,,u,rotwo tLno, -,c'. prclect os pet ttructuted opP@ed plun nored tn Rtpl' Non e ol i nspecti ng pl\ci o l.

M 0 H I N DE R 50 N t DET g NOToN' D F, Pfi M AN AA E R cause of action ol the respondent no.1 for issuance of demand letter, I c,rncelling the allotmenl ofthe compl.rinants for notmaking paymentagainst the duc amount, without achieving thc requisite construction for milestone in respect ol the tower in which unit of the complainants are situated is not justified.

Now, the qucstion before the authority is whether this cancellation is valid or The authority has gone through the payment plan, which was duly signed bv hoth the parties, which is reproduced for ready reference:_ I &HARERA S" GuRuGRAr,/ ConplaintNo.4346ot2024 3 4 5 6 7 8 I At the time ofbookins At the time ofFinishing 5olo olTotd Unrt Cost On start ofexcavat,on 12.50lo ofToral Unit Cost 12.5%ofTotalUnitCost Atthc timeofallotment Q! !sqplc!!s! e!1M L on completion ofsuper structuJe 200/o ofTotal Unit Cost 100/o ofTotalUnitCosr 10% ofTotal Unit Cost 50lo ofTotalunitcost 12.501, olTotal unit cosr On completion of2l3'd super structure 12.5% ofTotal Unit Cost 20.

Aiier considering the docLrments available on record as well as submissions made by the parties, the Authority observes that in the instant case, the unit in qtrestion was allotted to the complainantsvide allotment letter dated 24.04.2023 and as pcr the payment plan agreed between the parties vide builder buyer's dgreementdated 19.05.2023. k is matter ofrecordthatthe complainants booked the aforesaid unitunderlheabove mentioned paymentplanand paidan amount o1Rs.9,61,715/- towards total consideratio n ofRs.25,57,686/_which constitutes 37 a,0% of the sale consideration and they have paid the last payment only on 28.08.2023.

8.08.2023.'lhc respondent has jssued the demand under the head ot on canptetian of 1/3d aJsuper sttucture (unitcostand Bdlcony, was supposed to be raised on 15.03.2024.

However, the respondent no.1 acting in contravention ol thc asreed payment terms raised inadequate demand of Rs.3,19,711l fromthe conrplainants under rhc head On conpletion oI1/3d of super structure (unit cast ontl Bolcony)" vide an 'intimation cunr_demand letter' dated 15.03.2024, ie', prior to the.rctualdue date.

Thereaiter, the respondent no.1on non_paymeni of th. balance said ina{lequate demand and in continuation ol the said demand letler, issued a cancellrtion lelter ol thc subject unit and even published the name of conrplainants in the list of deiaukers ln a dailv newspaper namely 9 I 0n otrer ofpossessio! 'Punjab (esari' on 05.08.2024.

Moreover, post cancellation of the unil the complaint No 4346 oi2024 *TIARERA Ic"'or"'n'r"r:r""rzorr I &e,-n.eneM I "ndqd\q' respondenthas failed to refund the monies paidbythe complainants interms of Policy o12013, till date. ln light ofthe aforesaid reasoned nbove, the Authority observes that the levelof th. construction of the unit is to be taken as per the stage of construction of 'particular tower' in which the unit of the complainants is situated.

Thus, the level of construction of whole of th. proiect could not be t.eated as 'level of constructioD of the unit and demand of instalment is required to be raised accordingly.

Further, as per secuon 19(6) & 19(7) ofA.t of 2016, the allottee 's under oblig:tion to rnake payments towards consideration ofallotted unrt as per agreement to sale.

In view of the above, the said cancellation lette' dated 05 08.202.1 mnde by the respondent no.

1 in continuation oithe demand letter dated 15.03 2024, cannot be held valid in the eyes ollaw and is herebv set aside Thereiore, the respondent/promoter is obligated to restore the allotted unit ol Directions of the authorttY Hence, the authority hcreby passes thit orderand lss derand lssue the following directions trnder section :17 ofthe Act to ensure compliance of obligations casted upon the promoter as per the functions entrusted to the authority under section 34(0 of i. 'lhe cancellation lettcr dated 05.08 2024, is hereby set aside' The respondent no. l/promoter rs directed to restore the unit ot the complainnnt within a period of 30 days hom the date ofthis order and also issue a fresh statement ofaccount as Peragreed payment plan' ii. 'lhe .omplainants are dlccted to make the pavment to thc respondent/promoter as Per payment plan within a period of30 davs from the date olreceipt oilresh statement ofaccount' 21 c.

22.

HARERA GURUGRAN/ Frles be conrBned ro regisrry.

IAshok 23 24.

25.

Haryana Real Estate Re Dated:27.05.2025 omplaint No, 43,16 of 2024 The rate ofinterest chargeable from the allo deiault shall be charged at the prescribe respondent/promoter as per se.tion 2(za) of This decision shall mutatis mutandis apply to case mentioned in para 3 ofthis order where'n delails oipaid up J mou nt is menlro ed in each of the complaints.

Complarnt ds w"ll as applrcdlrons. il any stdnd dis sed oiraccordingly. vt-=s (viiay xumar Goyal) HARE GUTTUG M by the promoter in case of rate i.e., 11.10% by the _o '-b- U.r (Arun Kunar)