ALTA VISTA SOLUTIONS PVT LTD vs HSIIDC

HARERA GURUGRAM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM ORDER 1.

The present complaint has been filed by the complainant/allottee under section 31 of the Real Estate [Regulation and DevelopmentJ Act' 2016 M/s Alta Vista Info Solutions P!t.

Ltd. (Formerly known as M/s Combitic Global Pharma Pvt Ltd'l Regd. office at: - 17, New Rohtak Road, Karol Bagh, New Oelhi-rtOO05.

Complainant Versus M/s Haryana State Industrial & lnfrastructure Development Corporation ltd, Regd.

Office at: - C13-14, HUDA Complex, Scctor 6, Panchkulla-134109.

M/S Department of lndustries & Commerce, Haryana' Regd.

Office at:- 1* floor, 30 Bays Building, Sector 1'7, Chandigarh COMM: Shri Vijay Kumar GoYal Shri Ashok Sangwan Shri Sanjeev Kumar Arora APPEARANCE: Ms.

Nidhi lain None Complaint No.

654 of 2019 Complaint no.

664 ot z0l9 Date of comDlaint tt.o2.2019 Order pronounced on: 20.02.2024 Respondents Member Member Member Complainant Respondents Page 1 of 23 HARERA MGURUGRAM (in short, the Act) read with rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (in short, the Rules) for violation of section 11(4) (a) ofthe Act wherein it is ln ter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provisions of the Act or the Rules and regulations made thereunder or to the allottee as per the agreement for sale executed inter se.

Unit and proiect related details The particulars of unit details, sale consideration, the amount paid by the complainant, date of proposed handing over the possession, delay period, if any, have been detailed in the following tabular form: Complaint No.

564 of 2019 A.

2.

S.

N.

Particulars Details 1.

Name of the pro ject Prestigious Proiects, tor "lnformal ion Technology (lT)- enabled services", !!!,*.35,Gurugram.

Payment Plan Installment linked plan fAnnexure C-7 on page no.

38 of the complaint) 3.

Provisional allotment letter dated 09.0 9. ed 09.0 9.2 00 8 (Annexure C-5 on page no.

31 of the complaintJ +.

Regular letter of allotment (RLA] 07.11.2008 (Annexure C-7 on page no.

36 of the complaint) PageZ of 23 HARERA GURUGRA[/ tc"lllrh* *aaa "f ,4, _-.l Date of execution of agreement and acceptance of RLA 70.t2.2008 (Annexure R-5 on page no.27 ofreply) 6.

PIot no. as per the allotment letter PIot no.

51, Sector 35, Gurugram measuring 3,305 sq. mtr.

5th Floor, Tower-T4 (Annexure C-5 on page no.

31 ofthe complaintJ 7.

Revised plot no.

Plot no.

1, sector 34, Gurugram measuring 267 6 sq. mlr, Because Rate of industrial plot is revised from Rs.

8000/- to Rs.

15000. [AnnexureC-28 on page no.

88 of the complaint) 8.

Possession clause Clause VII of the RLA Although physical possession of the aforesaid plot shall be offered by the Corporltion upon completion of m i n i m um required [nfra structu re facilities in the area, it is however, made clear thot even after offer of physical possession ofplotto you, the same sholl be delivered Lo you only ofter hoving executed an agreement by you with HSIIDC, (Page no.

38 of the complaint) 9.

Due date of delivery of possession No date is specified in RLA (Clause VII of RLAI 10.

Completion certificate 11. offer of possession 06.01,.2021, Page 3 of23 B.

3.

I.

HARERA GURUGRA[/ Complaint No.

564 of2019 Facts of the complaintr The complainant has made the following submissions: - That the complainant, by application dated 16.01.2008, received by thc HSIIDC applied for allotment of 8000 sq.mtrs.

Industrial plot at Sector 34-35, Curgaon, Haryana with HSllDC, under category of "Prestigious Projects.

Along with the application dated 16.01.2008, the company annexed application form dated 15.01.2008, DD amounting Ils 60,00,000/- in favour of HSI IDC as initial payment i.e., 10y0 of total sale consideration of plot applied for allotment all requisite documents, project report etc. as per instruction of HSIIDC.

That vide letter dated 21.07. ted 21.07.2008, the ofnce of AGM, HSIIDC informed to appear before Higher Level Plot Allotment Committee, undcr Chairmanship of Commissioner & Secretary Industries, LIaryana, was to be held on 06.08.2008 in the office of HSIIDC at plot no.C-3-14, Sector 6, Panchkula, for considering the cases of allotment of industrial plot with proposed investment of 30 Cr. and above. lll.

That the complainant, through its Director Mr.

Pavel Garg, appeared for personal interview before plot allotment committee on the given date and time.

At the time, the complainant was informed by the office of II, t2.

Total consideration Rs.4,01,40,000/- (Annexure C-29 on page no.89 ofthe complaintJ 13. 'l'otal amount paid by the complainant Rs.4,05,91,193/- [As alleged by the complainant on page no.

15 of the complaint and agreed by the respondent) Page 4 of 23 ffi HARER^ ffieunuennl,r IV.

Complaint No.

664 of2019 AGM, HSIIDC that the rate of industrial plot in Gurgaon (sector 34-35] is revised from Rs.8,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per Sq.

Mtrs. for considerati0n of allotment of plot by appearing before allotment committee. 'fhat now vide letter dated 09.09.2008, thc office of HSIIDC informed the complainant that it has decided to allot industrial plot no.51, Sector- 35, Gurgaon, measuring 3305 sq. meters (tentative sizel at tentative rate of Rs.15,000/- per sq. mtrs.

In this way, the tentative total sale consideration ofthe plot having size of3305sq.mtrs @ Ils.15,000/- pcr sq. mtrs., proposed to bc allotted to the complainant, comes to Rs.4,9 5,75,000/-.

It was further directed to submit undertaking to implement the project within a period of 3 years from the datc of allotment and to pay balance application rnoney on account of 10yo cost of plot, if any.

It was also stated that regular letter of allotnent containing terms & conditions of allotment would be issued thereafter.

That now vide letter dated 16.09. ted 16.09.2008, it was informed by the cornplainant to thc office of tISIIDC that it has already deposited exccss money on account of 100/o of cost of plot as application money; as thc complainant had already deposited Rs.60,00,000/- againsr rhe rotal value of plot oF Rs.49,58,0000/- for a plot of 3305 sq. mrrs. 'fhat a regular lettcr of allotment dated 07.11.2008 was issued alor.rg with terms & conditions as well as letter ofacceptance, with stipulations that the total 35% oftotal price is payable within 30 days and remaining 650/o shall be payable in 5 six monthly instalments of Rs.64,44,750/-, staring from offer of possession, with schedule startinll front 07.05.2009 till 07.05.2011.

It was further stipulated rhat any dclay would attract the interest @ 14o/o p.a., on such delayed period. lD pursuance to the RLA, acceptance of regular letter of allotment datccl VI, Page 5 of23 MHARERA ffieuRueRRtlr Complaint No.

664 of2019 VI I.

VII I.

02.12.2008 with agreement dated 03.12.2008, on the lormat provided by the HSIIDC, were executed by the complainant. 'lhe total amount of Rs.l,,1,3,66,250 /- was paid by the complainant on 03.12.2008.

Hence, the total amount o f l\s.1,73,66,2501- was dcposited by the complainanr.

That now vide letter dated 20.11.2008, it was informed by the HSIIDC that allotment is being done without physical possession and further that the physical possession would be offered in due course ol completion of basic infrastructure facilitics, which includes provision of road, availability of water supply, sewerage facility and electrical infrastructure.

It was further stipulated in the said letter that HSIIDC will not charge any interest during the intervening period.

Irurthcr it was also specifically stipulated that the schedule for construction/ implementation of the project with minimum investment of Rs.3 0 crore, shall also be applicable from the date of offer of possession by the corporation. rporation. 'fhat the cornplainant had planned to set up unit immediately on taking possession of the plot.

The undertaking was sought by the LISIIDC and accordingly the undertaking to set up the unit was given by the complainant.

Considering the delay in development by the HSIII)C, and that the HSIIDC even failed to give any lirnt date of possessi0n of thc plot in question, the complainant had requested the HSIIDC, vide letter dated 17.01.2009, to allot the alternate plot to enable the complainant to set up the unit as the complainant intended to set up the unit immediately, fr.rr- which thc plot in qLrestion was applicd by thc complainant.

That vide its lerrer dated 24 /0212009 (Annexure-c/12J, rhe HSI IDC has directed the complainant to visit its office for change of plot and IX.

I'age 6 oI23 ffi HARERA #- eunuennM Complainr No.

664 of 2019 accordingly, the complainant had visited the office of HSllDC.

During such visit, after discussion with the MD, HSIIDC, the complainant gave representation to MD, HSllDC, vide letter dated 17.03.2009.

The I.ISIIDC did not consider the request of complainant.

X.

That without considering the request ol'the complainant as well as without any offer of possession, the HSIIDC, vide letter dated 28.10.2009, asked the complainant to deposit the instalment with interest.

But the complainant, vide Ietter datcd 02.11.2 009 clarified that in terms of Para 2 clause [vJ ofthe RLA dated 07.11.2008, the instalment and interest is payable only from offer of possession.

The same was again clarified vide letter dated 01.12.2009, annexed as Annexure-C/16.

XI.

That ignoring and mis-interpreting the terms and conditions of the RLA as well as the repeated representations given by the complainant, thc HSIIDC again, vide letter dated 02.L2.2009, asked the complainant to deposit the instalment with interest, falling due on 07.05.2009 and 07.11,.2009.

XIl. 'fhat the complainant again send the letter dated 21.12. ted 21.12.2009, on the similar issue, clarifying that as per the para 2 clause (vJ of the original draft of RLA dated 07.11.2 008 the instalments with interest will becomc due from the date of offer of possession only and that no possession has been offered till date.

But the HSIIDC continued demand of instalment, without offer of possession, vide letter daled 27.07.2009.

Under such circumstances and pressure, the complainant deposited the amount of Rs.1,28,89,5 00/-.

XIIL That the HSllDC, vide letter dated L7.03,2010, asked to pay the intcrcst on account of delay of instalment.

It was demanded without offer oI any possession of the plot in question.

The complainant, vidc letter datcd ?age 7 of 23 ffiH S-e ARERA URUGRAI\l Complainl No.

664 of 2 019 27.03.2010, again clarified the issue of interest which was notpayable as the possession ofthe plot was not offered till the date and requested the MD, HSIIDC to waive the interest as payment of instalments have not fallen due before possession ofthe plot.

XIV.

That towards 3rd instalment, the complainant again deposited the amount of Rs.64,44,750/-.

But vide letter dated 18.06.2010, the HSIIDC had intimated that it has adjusted the amount of Rs.10,50,860/- as interest.

Against such Ievy of interest, the complainant again, vide letter dated 26.06.2010, clarified the issue of interest as the HSIIDC was taking benefit of its own wrong in charging the interest though it could XV, not develop the site and failed in offering the possession of the plot but there was no response from the HSIIDC. 'Ihat under such compelling circumstances, the complainant, vide letter dated 30.06.2010 [Annexure-C/2 7), requested the HSIIDC to allor rhe plot no.1, Sector-34, Gurugram of smaller size in lieu of plot no.51, Sector-35, Gurugram.

Now vide letter datcd 02.07.2070, thc HSIIDC accepted the request of complainant to allot the plot no.1 measuring 2676 sq. mtrs.

Sector-34, Gurgaon; in lieu ofplot no.51 measuring 3 305 sq. mtrs. sq. mtrs., sector-35, Gurgaon.

Now for such plot of 267 6 sq. mtrs., the total sale consideration was reduced from the amount of Rs.4,95,75,000/- to Rs.4,01,40,000/-.'fhe re-schedulement letter dated l+.07.2010, in respect to new allotted plot no.1, was issued by the HSIIDC.

By way of this re-schedulement letter dated L4.07.2010, the HSIIDC imposed the interest of Rs.4,36,193/- on account of alleged delay of payment.

The HSIIDC committed illegality be demanding interest as the interest was not payable because neither the possession of plot was offered nor the credit of interest on excess amount already Page 8 of 23 ffiHARERA #- eunuennn,l Cornplaint No.

554 of2019 deposited was granted.

However, after imposing the illegal interest, the HSllDC, finally demanded the amount of Rs.38,90,693/-, payable until 0 7.0 5.2 01 1.

XVI. 'Ihat the interest and instalments wele not payablc at all becausc the entire fault was of LISIIDC as the HSIIDC failed to develop and offer thc possession of plot.

But still under dominance of FISIIDC and undcr compelling circumstances, the complainant company deposited thc final demanded amount of tls.38,90,693/ . ln this way, thc total amoLlnl of IIs.4,05,91,193/- was deposited by the complainant.

XVII.

That without offering any possession and without completion of development of the industrial estate where the allotted plot was located, the HSIIDC, vidc lctter dated 06.07.2017, sought clarification over steps for project implementation.

While issuing such letter in stereotyped manner, the HSIIDC ignored and overlooked that the possession of plot has not been offered to the complainant till date. 'l'hc complainant, vide letter datcd 02.08.201 7, requcsted to issr,lo lettcl of offer of possession and also to give credit of interest for delay in offer of p ossession.

XVIII. '[hat the total sale consideration of plot no.51, Sector-3 5, Gurugram was Rs.4,95,7 5,000/- rvhich was reduced to Rs. ced to Rs.4,01,40,0 00/-, against which thc complainant has paid an amount of Rs.4,05,91,1931-.

XIX.

That the HSIIDC failed to respond the letter dated 02.08.2017 and rather, the HSIIDC committed illegality and unfair practice which is clearly evident as IlSllDC vide letter dated 08.09.2017 , stipulated that there is still outstanding of lls.629/- and lurthcr that on non-paymert of dues, the plot is liable to be resumed.

Though the entire paymenL, as per own demand of I ISII DC was deposited by the complainant company Page 9 of 23 S HARERA ffieunucnnu xxt. xx.

Complainr No.

654 of2019 long back alongwith all the interest as imposed but still it was quite illegal, unreasonable, unfair and unequitable to stipulate that on account of alleged outstanding of Rs.629/-, the plot is liable to he resumed.

The complainant, vide letter dated 20.09.20L7, informed the HSIIDC that the full and final payment was deposited till 03_0S.2011, though no possession has been offered.

However, the complainant submitted the PO of Rs.2,000/- towards alleged demand of li.s.629/- ancl rest for unknown costs/dues in future, if any.

The complainant again requested to issue offer of possession ofthe plot so that the complainant company could start its project with immediate effect.

But there was no response from HSIIDC nor was the possession of plot offered.

That vide letter dated 15.11.2018, the corrplainant again req uested the HSIIDC to offer the possession of plot after completion of ali basic infrastructure at site and to pay interest on account of delay in offer of possession. 'fhat ignoring its own lctter dated 2 0.11.2 008, wherein it w.rs informeci by the HSIIDC that allotment is being done without physical possession and further that the physical possession shall be offered in due course on completion of basic infrastructurc facilities, which includcs provision of road, availabiliLy of water supply, seweragc facility and electrical infrastructure, the HSIIDC vide letter dated 07.12. ted 07.12.2018, asserted that road and water supply line is complete/available for plot in question but the sewer connection should be releascd after complction/occu pation certificate. ln thc said letter, the IISIII)C totally rcmained silent on thc issue of developnrent of mandatory electrical infrastructure as well as on the issue of offer of possession of plot. f)rc HSIIDC even failed to inform the expected time for obtaining tllc Page 10 of 23 MHARERA S* eunuennu Complaint No.

564 of 2019 mandatory occupation certificate of industrial estate where the plot in question was located, XXIL That further the HSllDC, ignoring its own letter dated 20.11.2008, wherein it was informed by the IISIIDC that allotnent is bcing done without physical possession and the schedulc for constructior / implementation oF the pro ject with minimum investment of Rs.3 0 crorc, shall also be applicable from the date of offer of possession by the Corporation, the HSlll)C vidc letter datcd 31,12.2018, referred and reiterated the Amnesty Scheme vide Circular passed in pursuance to BoD / HSIIDC 346-" meeting held on29.0812018.

XXlll.

Thattill date,theHSIII)Cfailedtoofferthepossessionof plotinquestior'l hence, it can be safely statecl that the I ISIII)C failed to develop and obtain the mandatory occupation certificate of the industrial estate where the plot in question is situated.

Hence, the HSIIDC has committcd thc deficiency and illegality, under such circumstances, the complainant company is entitled to the damages / intcrest @ "l4Vo, on equity basis and also entitled to exit its unit from the category of'Prestigious Projects', without any fee / penalty, due to deficiency and illegality committed by HSIIDC, as there is already huge delay in developing and giving the ofler of posscssion of plot which has not becn donc even till today, so due to lapse of such long time, under the changed circumstances, the cost and plan of project is bound to be changed C.

Reliefsought by the complainant: 4. ainant: 4. 'l'he complainant has sought following rclicf[s): I.

Direct the respondent to give possession and execution oftitle deed in respect to plot no.

1, sector 34, measuring 2676 sq,mtrs.

Page 11 ot23 ffiHARERA S- eunuennvr 11.

D.

5.

664 of2019 Il.

Direct the respondent to pay the statutory compensation in the form of interest, on amount deposited from their respective deposits till offer ofpossession, in the interest ofjustice.

Direct the respondent to convert its unit under category of regular projects from the category of Prestjgious projects, without any fee/penalty in the interest ofjustice,.

Ill.

Direct the respondents be further directed to refund the interest of RS.4,51,193/- illegally imposed upon the complainant.

Reply by the respondent/builder. 'fhe respondent has contestcd the complaint by filing reply on thc fbllowing grounds: - It is submitted that the complainant company applied for an industrial plot measuring 2 acres [8000 sqm.) size in the Industrial estate at Sector-34, Gurugram Vide application dated 16.1.200ti for settirrg up a project of l1'/l'f enabled services(ITES) under prestigious category with a proposed investment of Rs.

52.03 crores along with a Demand draft of Rs.

60,00,000/- on account of application money/10%t of tentative plot cost including Rs.

15000/- as processing fee.

It is submitted that the complainant company was informed that the State Government, after consideration has decided to revise the ratc oi industrial plot Gurugram (Sector-34-35), from I1S.8000/- to Ils.

15,000/- per sqm. with immediate effect.

Kecping in view thc revisiol of rate of industrial plots, the complainant company was given following two options which reads as : a. '[o opt out of scheme for allotment of plot: in case you opt not to participate in the allotment process your application money as well as processing fee will be refunded with intcrest @ 10% per annum for the period the amount remaincd credited with HSIIDC.

Page 12 ofz3 t.

12 ofz3 t. ffiHABERA S* eunuennnt Complaint No.

664 of2019 I ll. b. 'Io opt for consideration of allotrrent of plot anrl to appear before the Allotment Committee: ln case you are interested to be considered for allotment of plot, the revised rate as mentioned abovc shall bc applicable. ln case, you arc not successful, the application ntoney [without intcrest and processing feeJ shall be refunded to you, as per the existing policy of the Corporation. 'l'hat allotment committcc of the corpor.ation in its mceting helcl on 6.8.2008 and industrial plot no.51, sector-35, Gurugram measurinB 3 305 sqm at the tentative rate ofRs.

15,000/- per sqm.

Was allottcd k) complainant-company.

The decision of the committce was informcd to the complainant company vide letter datccl 9,9.20 0U (Annexurc R/2), complainant company was also asked to submit an undertaking and to remit balance application money if any so that Regular Lettcr of Allotment may be issued.

Vide letter received on dated 22.g.2OOg, complainant company submitted an urdertaking/affidavit dated 16.9.2 008 (Annexure R/3), wherein complaina nt company agree and undertake that: (il That we want to take physical possession of the said plot oll "as is where is basis"as we want to set Llp the projcct on thc said plot at the earliest possible, without the devclopmellt worl< completed by HSIIDC. [iiJThat in the absence ol complete developn]cnt work/infrastructure facilities !ikc l)ower, road, water Supply, Sewerage etc.J we would not lodge any claim whatsoevcr against HSIIDC Pagc 13 of 23 ffi HARERA S- eunuennvr Complaint No.

664 of 2019 (iii) l'hat the Implementation period of three years shall be counted from the date of offer of physical possession to us by the HSIIDC, Irurther, we also agree that the payment towards the cost of plot shall be paid by us in lurnpsum (within 60 days) or in installmcnts with interest @ 11%o on the outstanding amount from the date of offer of possession. ossession. 'l'hat we undertake to implement the project lvith minimum investment of Rs.

30 Crores in thc projcct il the form of fixed assets, within the afbrcsaid thrcc yc,ars pcriod. (iv) l'hat we will not bore tube well for drawing water witltout permission and we will make own arrangements for watcr through tankers from outside for construction of building. (v)'lhat we hercby r:ndertake that we shall be coverccl uncler- provisions of Industrial Policy-2005 of Haryana-Covt. and Estate Management Procedures-2005 of HSIIDC. (vi) That we hereby accept that the aforesaid allotment shall bc made at tentative allotntcnt ratc ol Its.

15000/- pcr sqnr. 'l'hat regular letter of allotment without offer of pos^scssion for allotment of plot no.

51 Sector-35, Gurugram measuring 3305 sqrn. was issued to the complainant company on 7.11.2009 [Annexure R/4) and an agreement was also executecl by the contplainant company with corporation on dated 10.l2.ZOOB (Annexure R/5), complainant company required to remit the balance 650lo tentative price (Rs.

3,22,23,750/-) in five equal half yearly installment of Rs.

64,44,750/- each with due date as 7.5.2009,7.11.2009,2.5.2010, 7.71.20L0 & 7.5.2011 without any interest and in case complainant Pagc 14 of 23 fhe RA RANI HARE GURUG vt.

Complairt No.

664 of2019 company failed to remit the payment on aforesaid due date only then complainant company shall be liable to pay interest for delayed period. v.

That it is submitted that the complainant company misinterpreted the contents of letter d,ated 20 /11,/2018 and ir is further submifted that the complainant was liable to pay the delay interest only in case it failed to remit the installments of plot cost on due date mentioned in RLA/agreement executed by the complainant. 'l'hat It is submitted that the complainant nisinterprctcd the terms and conditions of RLA and again made a reprcsentation dated2ll72/2009 against the demand raised by the Respondent No.1. dent No.1. 'lhereafter, thc Rcspondent no,1 replied to the representation made by thc complainant in which it was clearly mcntiored that tho interest on the outstanding amount is applicable in cascs where physical possession ofthe plot is oflered by the corporation in favour ofthe allottee.

Sincc the physical possession of the plot in Sector-34 & 35, Gurugrant has not been offered till date, thcreforc, no interest has bccn chalgccl.

However, the amount of principal amount is to be paid as per schcdule without the interest component.

Further, in case of default in payment of installments on due dates, interest @ l4o/o per annum rvas also rcquired to be paid by thc complainant for thc dclaycd pcriod. 'l'hat it is submitted that the office of respondent ncvcr received the letter dated 27/03/2010 from the complainant. flowever thc complainant be directed to prove the averments made by him through cogent and coherent evi(ieDCe. 'l'hat the corporation also announcecl an amncsty scheme for all thc allottees of the industrial plots allotted under prestigious category to opt for Exit Route" under clause 5.8 v of EMI,-2015.'l'hc alorcsaid vlt, vllt, Page 15 ol23 HARERA ffiGURUGRAI/ E.

6.

7.

554 of2019 scheme was informed to the to thc complainant company on 25.10.2018 & 3t.L2.20t8 (Annexure R/11) along with copy of operational circular of the scheme.However, it is pertincnt to mentioned here that the aforesaid schente was not applicable in case the plot is lying vacant and as complainant failed even to start thc construction activities therefore the complainant is not eligible for thc aforesaid scheme as per the DMp - 201S.

All other averments made in the complaint were deniecl in toto.

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

Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the complaint can bc decided on the basis of those undisputed documents and oral as wcll as written submissions made by the parties. e parties.

Jurisdiction of the authority The authority observes that it has territorial as well as subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the reasons grvcn below.

E.l Territorial jurisdiction As per notification no. l/92/20t7-1TCp dated 1,4.12.2017 issued by '[own and Country Planning Department, the jurisdiction of ]lcal Dstatc Regulatory Authority, Curugram shallbe cntire Gur.ugram District for. all purpose with offices situated in Gurugram.

In the present case, the project in question is situated within the planning area of Gurugram District.'fherefore, this authority has complete territol.ial jur.isdir:rion to deal with the prescnt contplaint.

E.ll Subiect matter iurisdiction 8.

I'>age 16 of 23 ffiHARERA #, eunuennu Complaint No.

664 of 2019 9.

Section 11(4J(aJ of thc Act, 2016 providcs that the promotcr shall be responsible to the allottees as per agreement for sale.

Section 11(4)(aJ is reproduced as hereunder: Secti o n 11.,.,. (1 )'the p r a mater s h o l l - (a) be responsible Jbt all obligations, responsibilities qn(l Iunctiotls under the provisiotls of this Act or the rules and rcgulutians macle thereuncler or tu the ollottees os per the agreement for sale, or Lo the ossociation of qllottees, as the case nta)/ be, till the conveyence ol all the apartnlenLs, plots ar buildinlls, cts the cose may be, to Lhc allottees, or Lhe conltnott areos to the ossocioLion af olloLtees or Lhc conlpetent autharity, as the cose tnay be; Section 34-Futctions oI the Authority: 34(fl of the Act ptovides to ensure complionce of the obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the reql estate aqenLs under this Act and tlle rules qnd regulations marle thereuncler.

So, in view of thc provisions of the Act qLroted above, thc autltority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non- compliance of obligations by the promoter Ieaving aside compensatior) which is to be decided by the adjudicating oflicer if pursued bv the complai he complainants at a latcr stage.

Findings on the reliefsought by the complainants.

F.l Direct the respondent to deliver the possession of the allotted unit and pay the delay possession charges along with prescribed rate of interest. ll.Direct the respondent to pay the statutory compensation in the form ofinterest, on amount deposited from their respective deposits till offer of possession, in the interest of iustice.

Ill.Direct the respondents be further directed to refund the interest of RS.

4,51,193/- illegally imposed upon the complainant The above mentioned reliefs no.

F.l, F.ll, & F.lll as sought by the complainant is being taken together as the findings definitely affect the result of the other reliefs and interconnected 10.

F. in one relief will these reliefs are Page 17 ot23 11.

HAREl?A P* GURUGRAM 12.

664 of2019 The complainant allottee filed the present compliant on 11.02.2019 and the same was disposed off on 18.12.2019 wherein it was held that this authority doesn't have jurisdiction to adjudicate the present mafter as the allotment of the subject plot was done by the respondent in the year 2008.

Further, the complainant was advised to approach the principal Secretary to Government of Haryana, lbwn and Country plannrng Department, Chandigarh.

However the complainant allottee preferred an appeal against the said order of this authority and in consequence of it, the Ilon,ble Appellate Tribunal allowed thc said appeal and set asidc thc impugned order dated 18.1,2.2019 passed by this authority.

The operative part of thc order of the Appellate Tribunal dat ed 14.10.2020 is as uncler:_ "The relevant provisions ofthe Acthove come into force w,e,f.01,05.2012.

On that date, there wqs no motorsble rood in front of the plot of the oppellant there was no water supply system and the sewerqge disposql network is not yet complete.

The physical possession of the plot has not been offered to the appellant even todqy. ven todqy.

So, we are of the considered opinion thot the provisions oJ the Act hove becone qpplicqble to the project in question and the leorned authority was required to qdjudicate the complqint frled by the qppellont on merits.

The view taken hy the learned quthority thst it hos no jurisdiction as the allotment was nlrttle in the year 2008, is totally erroneous ds the respon.lents/promoter have yet to IuUi their obligqtions.

Consequently, the impugned order cqtlnot be sustqined in the eyes of law, Thus, keeping in view our afotesaid discussions, the present oppeol is hereby allowed.

The impugned order date.l 18.12.2019 passed by the learned Authority is hereby set qside.

The case is renanded to the Page 18 of 23 HARERA GURUGRAIi Complaint No.

564 of2019 learned Authority for adjudication olthe comploint lited hy the alrpellant on merits".

13. 'Ihe matter was remanded back by the Appellate Tribunal with thc directions to both the parties to appcar before thc Authority oI 02.1.1.2020.

Both the parties were issued notices for appearance and matter has been heard at length.

14. 'fhe complainant applied for allotment ofRs.8,000/_ sq.mtrs, inclLrstrial plot at sector-34, Gurgaon, Haryana un(lcr category of .prestigior.ls projects' for 'lnformation l.echnology [lTJ & Il.enablc services.

On 2L.07.2008, the office of AGM, HSIIDC informed the complainant ro appear before the plot allotment committee for considering the casc of allotment of industrial plot.

The complainant appeareci before thc committee and vide letter dated 09.09.200U, thc respondent_ corporation issued allotment letter of plot no.

51, sector_35,GLrrgaon measuring 3305 sq. mtr at tentative ratc of Rs.

15,000/ per sq. nrtr. [total sale consideration is Rs. a,95,75,000/ .) 15.

The complainant states that there is dclay in development by the HSIIDC, even HSIIDC failed to give any firm date ofpossession ofthe plor in question. question.

Further, the instalment and intcrest which rvas to be paid at the time of offer of possession, was cientanded cven lreforc that. .Ihc llsllDC sent various reminders letters to the complainant to pay thc instalments and interest on account of delay deposits of instalntent without oFfer ofpossession ofthe plot in quostion.

0n the contr.ary, thc responden t-co rpo ratio n statcs that thc contplaillant-cotnpat)y on 7.11.2008 (Annexur.e R/4J and an agreement was also exccutcd by tllc complainant company with corporation on clated 10.12.200g [Annexure R/5), wherein schedule of thc payment of the renrarninl3 Pagc 19 oi 23 HABERA ffiGURUGRAI/ 17.

L6.

664 of 2019 6570 tentative price ol the plot was given without imposing any intercst.

The complainant company required to remit the balance 6S% tentative price [Rs.

3,22,23,750/-) in five equal half yearly insra]lment of Rs.

64,44,750/- each with due date as 7.5.2009,7.tt.ZOOg,7.5.2010.

7.11.2010 & 7.5.20L1 without any interest and in case complainant company failed to remit the payment on aforesaid due date only then complainant company shall be liable to pay interest l.or delayed periocl.

Consequently, on 30.6.2010, the complainant rcquestcd the IlSllDC to allot an alternative plot, namely plot r)o.

1, sector 34, Curugram, Haryana.

HSIIDC accepted this request via letter dateLl Z/7/2010, allotting plot no.

1 measuring 2676 sq.mtrs. in Iieu of plot no.

51, with thc revised total sale consideration of Rs.4,01,40,000/_.

After thc change of plot number, the re-schedulement of thc balance principal cost of plot without any interest was also conveyed to the complainant- company.

It is important to nole that a undefiaking given by the courplainant_ allottee dated 16.09.2008 before the regular letter of allotment datcd 0 7.11.2008 wherein the complainant has undertaken to accept the plot on "as in where is basis" and agreed not to lodge any clainr ag. clainr ag.rilsl HSIIDC, which is reproduced as below: l,Thot we want to tqke physical possession of the said plot on ,,as is where is basis" as we want to set up the project on the soid plot qt the eqrliest possible, $,ithout the developmentwork completed by HSIIDC 2.

That in the qbsence of comptete development work/infrastructure focilities (like Power, Road, Water Supply sewerqge etc.) we would not lodge any claim whatsoever agoinst HSILDC.

Pagc 20 of 23 ffiHARERA H euRuennnr Subsequently, the complainant vide letter dated 30.06.2010 voluntarily requested a plot change from allotted plot no.

51 ofsector 3S to plot no.

1 of sector 34.

Which is reproduced below as: In continuation of our letter datcd 26.06.2070 it is further submitted that we cqme to know thatPlotNo.l atSector 34, Gurgqon isvacqntand you qre hereby requested to allot the some plot to us in lieu of our old plot No.

57 at Sector 35, Gurgqon The said request of the complainant vide letter dated 30.06.2010 was accepted by HSIIDC on 2.7.20L0 by stating that ,, 1n rhis regard, I am directed to say thot your request for change of plot ollotted by H Sll DC in Sector 35, Gurgaon hos been considered and it has been decided to allot Plot no.1, Sector 34, Gurgaon measuring 2676 sq. mtr. in lieu of Ptot No.51, Sector 35, Gurgaon measuring 3305 sq. mtr. 'fhe other terms and conditions of the ollotment shall remain unchanged.

The reschedulment of the amount to be paid by you towards the cost of the plot shalt be conveyed by the Estate Manager, Ildyog Vihgar, Gurgaon separately." Possession ofthe unitwas offered on 06.01.2021, with an obligation on the respondent to obtain an occupation certificate as per clause 10 of the RLA, the same is reproduced below: lO.

That the ullottee shall opply lor un occupotion certificate in ttrc concerned Iiled olJice of HSIIDC Fiirther, Further the procedure to grant occupation certificote sholl be govemed b! the rules & regutations ol Department of Town & Country Plonning, Iluryana , Iluryana, as amended from time to aime." 20.

After consideration of all the facts and circumstances, the authority is of view that the reliefs of delay possession intercst is declined in view of the undertaking given by the complainant to accept the plot on "as is where is basis" and voluntary change ofallotted plot no 51 of sector 35 to plot no.

1 ofsector 34.

Further the complainant has taken a plea that Complaint No.

664 of2019 18, 19.

Page 2l of23 ffiHARERA S-eunuennnr complainr No.

664 of2019 2L. the respondent demanded the interest on delayed instalments which was to be paid at the time of offer of possession.

It is important to note that the respondent was required to remit the balance 65%o in five equal instalments without any interest.

Ilowever, in case complainant failed to remit the payment in time then complainant would be liable to pay interest for the delayed period.

The respondent has charged interest from the complainant on account of payment delayed by the complainant as per the payment plan agreed in the I{LA.

Therefore, the reliefs against the respondents in this regard are not admissible.

IV.Direct the respondent to convert its unit under category of regular proiects from the category of prestigious proiects, without any fee/penalty in the interest ofiustice.

The complainant took a plea that it was allotted subject ultit under the category ofprestigious projects.l'he complainant requested the IISII DC to change the category of the project from prestigious to general projects but the respondent did not pay any heed to the complainant.

On the contrary, the respondent builder states that the complainant should file the application before the appropriate authority for changing of category of the projects from the prestigious project to the general projects. 'fhe authority is ofview that the exit route for the allottees of prestigious pro,ects category has specifically been menrioned in rhe 5.9(bJ [v) of the EMP-2015.

EMP-2015.

The complainant allottee may accordingly opt the mentioned exit route by making a representation to the competent authority as per the provision ol industrral policy ot 2005 of Haryana Government.

The competent authority may to decide the matter within the period of 3 months from the date of this order as per applicable provision ol the policy.

22.

PaBe 22 of 23 MHARERA ffi eunuennrvr Complaint No.

664 ot2019 G, Directions ofthe authority 23.

Hence, in view of the factual as well as legal positions detailed above, the complaint filed by the complainant seeking above reliefs against the respondents is not admissible and the same is hereby ordered to be rejected.

24.

Complaint stands disposed of.

25.

File be consigned to registry. \tt- =---) (Vijay Kuffir Coy at) Member Datet 20.02.2024 r$Mtlr rv* i'oraJ PaBe 23 ol23 I 1esh6t< s$=-gwanl Menifer