VANDANA SHARMA AND RAJIV SHARMA vs ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED

ffiHAREI #-eunuei BEFOR NAME OF BUILDI PRO| ECT N M S.

No, Cas N 1, cR/1 /2 2 cR/8, /2 3 cR/e l2 4 cR/1t /', 5 cR/1( 6 cR/1: 1 cR/e B cR//1 4 THE HARYA AUTHO ITY, GURUGRAM ESTATE RIJGU TORY Order reserved on: Date of pronouncement: TIOUSING LTD.

ANSAL HUB 83 02.2023 ,o5.2023 o, )22 ',1022 "a022 '.a022 2022 Radha of 2022 & Complaint No.

Ansal Housing Ansal Housing Vinita Ya Shrri, GN Shrri.

Kadyan Ved Pa Aruna S hliv/s Shri.

GN SLrri.

Kadyan Ansal Housing arma V/S Ansal Dinesh K Shri.

GN Shri.

Kadyan sal Housing Shri.

Kadyan Ansal Housing Shri.

GN Rajiv Sharma 12022 Vandana Page 1 of26 I xrdyrn I u __ Housing lLimited Amandeenl Anrandcep ffiHAREMJ:, #-eunuer{Arvr CORAM: Shri Vijay Kumar Goyal ShriAshok Sangr,r'an before tlhis (negulatflon 2. cyrcl+1 these c{ses pertains to failure o Page 2 of 26 2022 2022 V/S Ansal Hou ng Limited complainr No.

11 of 2022 & ors' Shri.

Amandee Kadyan Shri.

GN Gautam Shri.

Amande KaLdyan Shri.

GN G{utam Manoj Kumar ancl Ansal Housi PN Vijay and Arch I-lousing ORI Sh ri.

Kadyan Amandee Member Member ER L0 complaints titled as above filed under section 31 of the Real Estate ies. ran Singh V/S g Limited 1.

This order shall dispose of all th authority in form C and Development) A , 20!6 (hereinafter refefred as "the Act") refld with rule 28 of the aryana Real Estate (Re$ulation and Development) Rules, 2017 (he inafter referred as "the rules") for Act wherein it is inter alia prescribed violation ol' section 11(4)(a) of thL that the promoter shall be responsibilities and functions to sale executed inter se between Pa ponsible for all its obligations, he allottees as per the a$reement for The corp issues emanating fro them are similar in nalure and the complainant(s) in the above refe matters are allottees o]f the project, namely,l"y'nsal Hub 83" [Comm rcial Colony) being developed by the /s Ansal Housing Ltd.

The terms and nts, fulcrum of the issue involved in all same reppondent/promoter i.e. moter i.e., conditions of the buyer's agreem the part of the promotpr to deliver 9 ffiH #.e ARE timely compen compen 3.

The deta possess paid a Proiect I Clause 2 "The de from the earthqua generol sh order, ru competen beyond th COtTtp€nSOt control of rf the complain to status, unit no., date o agreement, n ,llause, due date ion, total sale r:onsid tion, total nt, and relief so en in the table below: arme and tion . shall offer of sanction of is later subject to f,'ood, civil commoti of energy la equt iorr, strike, lockouts, actio,n ' co qstruction ag ency a, t or notification issued s ession of the its i tion charges at tion. authority or in control of the d on the grounds of d Teveloper." rticulars pation certificate question, seeking awa pres ribed rate of interte ony ol ry in repl rf po t are of delay and the Complaint No. of2022 & " Sector-83, of 36 months of god, fire, sabotage, or failure of te with any t, or eny notic'e, public or reason(s) beyond the ING LTD "ANSAL HUB Gurugram. unit ony time, within a or date of executtton of circumstances such as riot, explosion, terrorist facilities materiol o of lobour union, any by the developer, change of courts/tribunals ond/or any tory authorities, or any allottee(s) shall not be 'ering possession due to i DETAILS Not obtained 1,L.09.20L3 te of building plan Page 3 of26 tran (Elmph4qls supplied) I Detrils b. ffi,& HARE GURUG f1t^ c.

Dr d P d.

D1 e.

RI The unit elr S. no Comp no. & 1. cR/1 Date 28.0 t/ I .2 2. cR/r Date 28.O ,/i I .21 lrt 4.

0 Complaint No.

1 ors.

L of 2022 & ate of Possession tt.09.2016 Due date calculated fr sanction of building plan i., being later except ir CR / L37 B / 2OZZ wlherein t calculated from ttre date i.e., 15.09.2014 being late in this particular rc?se tht possession comes out to be )m date of t.,11..09.201,3 case no. re due date is of allotment r accordingly due date of 1.5.09.2017 icense details 87 of 2009 in fa'u'our of Singh & Mrs.

Meerra Devi Infrastructure Pvt. cture Pvt.

Ltd dat( valid up to 29.12.2013 Mr.

Virender :/o Aakansha 'd 30.12.2009 registration Not registered ted details of each co olaint are as under: t Unit no. and area measuring Dat allc lel;t lof fment )r Relief sought Total r Price Amou the c (AP) ale (BsP)/ rt paid by rmplainants.

22 2 045 admeasuring 357 sq. ft. lpg.

37 ol complaintl 24.t lpe cor 9.2072 tZ of plaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 31,84 AP: { t ;33/- i0,64,8461- o22 t22 A1'M-1 admeasuring 226 sq.l't. lpe, 1,7 of comolaintl 26. lpg con Tra uni nar cor 25. lpe cor )9.201,2 13 of rplaintl nsfer of tin re of rplainant t0.201.2 L1 of rplaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 18,30 AP:{ T 27s/- 6,42,628/- Page 4 of26 1t0 02 HARE GURUGI 3. cR/e Date 28.0 /2 4. cR/1 Date 2L.0 2 5. cR/1 Date 2t.o .2{ 6. cR/1 Date 28.O iB I .2t 7. cR/e Date 15.0 6 2t B. cR/l Date 08.0 IB I .21 e.

I cR/ 37 2C ,2Cl 0 Complaint No.

1 ors, I of 2022 & 422 22 038 admeasuring 602 sq. ft. lpg.

1.2 of complaintl 24. lpig con 0.2011 1.2 of plaint.l DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 56,82, AP: {l { ;s0/- 1,33,708/- 2022 '22 002 admeasuring 602 sq. ft. lpg.

12 of complaintl 08. lprg con 2.2072 72 of plaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 57,76, AP:{! { tez/- 2,e7,42s/- 2022 22 119 admeasuring 319 sq. ft. lpg.

30 oi complaintl 02" lpe con 5.2012 11, of plaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 23,87 AP: { { )s3/- 3,61,056/- 022 ?

305 admeasuring 2724 sq. ft. lpe.

12 of complaintl 11. [pe cor t6.2012 72 of olaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP:{ 1,84,4 AP: '1,,72,9 ;,782/- t ;,936/- 2022 22 052 admeasuring 574 sq. lt. lpg.

12 of complaintl 01 lpe C0tI Tra uni nar CC 2!;. lpe cor )3.201.2 1,2 of rplaintl nsfer of tin ne of rplainant )2.2014 .

1.7 0f rplaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation BSP: 58,1 B AP: { { 300l- ;2,90,5741- /2022 ,?

025 admeasu ring 352 sq. ft. lpg, 1.2 of complaintl 10 Ip,t COI )7.2012 , 1. .2012 , 1.2 of rplaintl DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 30,50 AP: { t 708/- 30,29,559 /- /2022 22 GF-OB admeasu ring 574 sq. ft. [pg.

13 of complaintl 1l; h,t col )9.2014 .

13 of rnlaintl DPC & Possession Cost ol' litigation TSP: 59,85 AP: { { 732/- ;5,55,092/- Page 5 of ,2 t2 /2 02 t+/ t)2 B rD, 26 ffi,HARE #,ounue 5.

The afo promo between possessi prescrib 6.

It has complia respo authori promo th o{ ila OZ artd ior for () rh 7. rules The f, also si cR/11 consid entire The amoun posse ti o A.

8. tabula of 26 Complaint No.

1 ors' I of 2022 & /2022 22 05 admeasuri 602 sq. ft. lpg.

15 I complaint rg f 01. lpe COI 15 of rplaintl 1.2011 DPC & Possession Cost of litigation TSP: 59,87 AP: { t )BBl- ;3,04,6621- rid complaints v )n account of vi e parties in resl by the due date, I rate of interest ar decided to treat I r of statutorY o : in terms of se, to ensure coml the allottee[s) a he regulations me rf'all the comPlai r.

Out of the abov 22 Vinita Vadav ion for determini runt along with in rd unit related d culars of the Pr aid try the comPl :r, delay period, rm: /ere tl olatiort pect o seekin rd cor the sari rbligat ction rlianct rnd th, tde thLt nts filt 'e-mer V/s A ing the Lterest etail:s oject, ainanl if anr led by the comPlainants r of the buyer's agreem€ f said unit for not handj g award of delaY Possessi< pensation. d complaints as an aPPlica ons on the Part of thr 34(0 of the Act vrhich n r of the obligations cai : real estate agents undet :reunder. :d by the comPlainant(s)/ tioned case, the Particulat nsal Housing Ltd. are bei : rights of the allottee(s) q and comPensation. the details of sale cons [s), date of ProPos;ed har , have been detailed in against the nt executed ng over the n charges at :ion for non promoter andates th I upon th the Act, th lotteeIs)ar, of lead cas g taken int a refund th deration, t ding over t the followi Page 6 il- rl he he he Jare CASE into I the ticula paid I he he ng ffiHARE #-eunUel al an R/rL/2022Vin Yi Complaint No. plaint No.

L ors, of 2022 & V/s Ansal Housing Particu lars Details name and locatio "Ansal Hub-83", Sector-83, Guru Jram ject area 2.46875 acres ure ofthe project Commercial colony ]P ,US license and of licensee alidity 87 of 2009 dated 30.72.20t 29.72.2073 19 valid up t Mr.

Virender Singh ,& Mrs.

Aakansha lnfrastructure Pvt.

Lt< tleena Devi c/( registration detai Not registered no.

045 [pg.37 of complaintl t measuring 357 sq. ft. lpg 37 of complaint] e of allotment letter i rriginal allottee name' 24.09.2012 lpe.12 of complaintl eof ns' sanction of ion clause rilding 11.09.2013 26.

The developer shall of_fer posse: any time, within a period of j the date of sanction af buildin of execution of allotment lett later subject to force majeure cir os act of god, fire, earthqur commotion, war, riot, explosio, sabotage, or general shortage t equipment focilities moterial o of transportotion, strike, locA labour union, an), dispu contractor/construction ogenc. the developer, change of law, order, rule or noti,ficqtion courts/tribunals andTor any competent outhority o,. interver, authorities, or any ot,her reasc control of the developer.

The all sion of the unit 5 months from 7 plans or date r, whichever is :umstances such ke, llood, civil , terrorist Tcts, f energy labour supplies, failure )uts, action of e with qny oppointed by or ony notice, 'ssued by lny ther public or :ion of statutory t(s) beyond the tttee(s) shall not PageT of26 1. i i 4.

5. ffi' ilir. rflsli qilc, HART GURUGI u( )y ias ic ay nl Ilc tn onlp bt;i usto rB.l1 onlp toi,t onlp -'d 3e i5 cf rii"1 ,?nti t2.

13.

14.

15.

1,6.

77.

18.

Facts of 1 'fhe coml a.

That betw offer n€c lan orr I 3e:l pcrsl B.

9.

Complaint No.

1 ors. of2022 & be entitled to ony contpensotion of deloy in offering pr2ssession beyond the control ofthe develop (Emphasis supplied) [pg.

21 of complaint] on the grounds due to reasons ,.r." date of possession 11,.09.2016 [Note: Due date calculated fron of building plan i.e., 11.09. e., 11.09.2013 date of sanctior reing later.l in handing over of' ;sion till the date of this i.e., 06.0'2.2023 6 years 4 months 26 days ic sale consideration as per ment plan annexed with tment letter at page 12 of' rplaint. t 30,94,800/- rl sale consideration as per omer ledger dated 1.2020 on pg.

32 ol' plaint { 31,84,533/- ll amount paid by the plainant as per customer er dated 08.01.2020 on pg f complaint < 30,64,846/- pation certificate Not yet obtained ol possession Not offered complaint nant has made the follo 24.09.201 2, Builder r the parties wherein a ssession of unit within wing submissions in the c Buyer Agreement was ; per clause 26, the deve 36 months from the datr ,mplaint: - ntered into )per should of sanction Page B of26 ssessi stomer ffiHA lER,,, br(Ar\r \R RUI GU 'li 'r' f#il \1\&/ b. of build lng plans or date of ex later.

That vide letter dated 15.05 erstv'irhite owner that the sho sHo+-cF27 from sHoP-GF25 d. been changed and the area of ft. fronr 376.76 sq. ft. and ;r been revised to Rs 24,t15,434t| 433487 .25.04 / -. c.

That out of the total cost of tht: paid by the complainant to tlh per the builder buyer agreem possession w,as 24.09.20Ls 95o/o of total consideration, t posspssion, which is illegal and That derspite repeated calls a definite commitment was sho and no appropriate action w grier{ances of the complainant. e.

That repeated calls, meeti resppn,lent and multiple visits not only caused loss to the co energy but also caused mental That the cause of action aro against the respondent from t it further arose when re Complaint No.

1[ of 2022 & ors. ution of allotment letter, whichever is 014, the respondent in]formed the no. of the shop hurs been changed to nd area and cost of the shop has also e shop has been reduced to 357 sq. rctingiy basic cost of the shop has and PLC Cost has been revised to Rs said unit a sum of tls.

30,64,846/- was respondent till 02.11,.2q19. .11,.2q19.

That as nt, the committed date of offering the ut even after payment of more than e respondent is still not offering the arbitrary. d meetings with the respiondents, no n for timely completion o[ the project s taken to address the c$ncerns and and correspondences with the to know the actual construction status plainant in terms of time, money and gony to him. in favour of the Complainilnt and e date of booking of the laid unit and ndent failed/neglected to deliver Page 9 of26 ffiHAREI ffi-eunuet po cau the ssion of the said units ' o1'action further arose \ / lic project with the assr"t and it is continuing and i :slrondent has still not rr: rtions as per the Builder ,E rglrt by the complainant lainant has sought followj t l.he respondent to hart rssion charges at prescriLr C.

10. a the obli Relief The com 11. a.

Di po b.

Cost f litigation.

On the promote relation guilry. ate of hearing, t allout the contra section 11(a) (a D.

Reply th e respondent.

1,2.

The a.

Tha mai ad fil law and facts.

It is subnt tainable before this ttrtd that she has no the present complai : to be dismissed on au tio of I-lort tpa nt uyer's Agreement. relief(s) liab this nd alone.

Page 10 of26 of2022 & ithin a stipulated time od.

The en the respondent has no completed facilities and ameniti It further still subsisting on day-to- ay basis as fied his defects and not fulfilled his over the possess;ion a rate of interest. pay delay ority explained trl the as alleged to have been ndent/ e act to plead guilty or t to plead plaint on the following rounds. tenable by neither maintainable no tted that the present co aint is not e Authority, as the com lainant has the full amount.

The co inant has king interest.

The present plaint is mitted in of 2022 & of the provisions of the the terms and condit 0L2, as shall be evide ing paragraphs of the p t reply. inant has no locus;-stand aint.

The present compla ed the respondent so an independent unit in i ainant, in pursuance of shop bearing no. earing no. l3F-45, or cause of nt is based as well as ns of the from the me in the upcoming e aforesaid und floor B 83" (hereinafter be re red to as r-83, Gurugram.

It is su mitted that ing the respondent, ha conducted ject and it quiries regarding the P was being fully satisfied uding but not limited to ith regard he capacity development of the e and the nt and informed decision anner. to purchase inant vide application brm dated ndent for provisional a ent of a , Gurugram.

Page 11 of26 83 situated at sector I in HARE GURUG lv()n otherwise, the compl r to file the present comp el'roneous interpretation rccrrect understanding ( nent letter dated 24.09;, is:;ions made in the follorn the complainants ?ppro?r 201,1 for the purchase of ential project "ANSALS fI prrject") situated in Sect cnrplainant prior to appro rsive and independent el rnly after the complainan al;pects of the project, in e respondent to underta llainant took an indePenrl .nit, un-influenced in any r thereafter the compla 5.2011" applied to the res in the project.

The comP ication fbrm, was allotted :oject named ANSALS HIJ That actio on ani allo sub That year resi the the exte WAS toa of com the Tha 16. uni app ffi /S$il ti!ii.b/ b.

C. d. ffiHARETII #-eunuerJhrrl il The complainant consciouslY linked plan for remittance of question and further rePrel complainant shall remit every schedule.

The resPondent ha the conrplainant.

That dr:spite there being a n respondent itself infused fun developed the Project in qu construction work of the Proi will be comPleted within Pn respondent to the authoritY. f.

That vrrithout prejudice to respondent, it is submitted t: over the possession to the no force majeure circum respotrdent, there had bet: absolutely beYond and out orders dated t6.07.20t2, 3L Punjab & I{arYana High Cou 200311 of 2008 through whi'c banned which is the e.

11. of 2022 & ors.

022 & ors. nd wilfully opted for a construction he sale consideration for the unit in ented to the res;Pondent that the nstalment on time as per the payment no reason to suspect the bonafide of mber of defaulters in the project, the into the project and has diligently tion. lt is also submitted that the is swing on full mode and the work scribed time Period as given bY the e aforesaid and the rights of the at the respondent would have handed mplainant within time had the're been ances beyond the control of the several circumstances which were f control of the resPondent such as 7.2012 and 21..08.201,2 of the Hon'ble duly passed in civil writ petition no' the shucking /exl.raction of water was ackbone of constructfon Process, Page LZ of26 ffiHAI #-eun simu usl Nati I Gree causi Air Qu at la witho di ion issu R/2 B/L-91, t da october CONS ction Iexcl used ing inte to rem d No ber 1-1 gene ting du d ct from one buy f the ma as dem proj The ts.

The udden res cop its with the well s in com siness in the respo Tha buil rest bein lrders Iribur ty Ind admil by MCG ( 018 u tivitie Lal fini n clor 2018 pollut vembr facto retizal rment rictior bour 1 etter ance ( lent is y orcl rn Tril "rality J lut ad red b to MC r 201,t activi ernal I nain ( 10-20 rst pol Nover ain far noneti paym( estrict : labor .n lettr rplian< onden er buyer due to COVID"19 the lo Page 13 ol26 of 2022 & of EPCA wide letter No EPCA- and MCG Gurugram an order p all the rh they have directed to ng excavation, civil nstruction rk where no constructio material is lhi and other NCR d ict from rent dates passed by ining thereby the exca worse, may be ha.rmful liability.

Apart from th the stone crushers, hot ain closed in Delhi an lly to workers to only bu drawals led the rerspond e Hon'ble on work the public from the mix plants other NCR unable to 018 etc.

The demoneti ion is also ay in giving possession the home abrupt stoppage of rk in many liquid cash. quid cash.

However, the responde is carrying t of the builder buyer ment as bodies of Haryana Go rnment. his business in letter an spirit of the own was ffiHARE #-eunue i the nstruction and conseq hand err the possession on ti of th respondent. sirnilarly lockdown was ,": t,t\/ rlV edl throughout the countt rnstruction and conseq' verr the possession on tin respondent. sirnilarly lockdown wat led to the year 2022 whi qurently respondent was re as the same was beyort :hr: ban on construction of India in the year 2021, throughout the count h.

That CX con on t.i, That cou in proj That und Hon and thu also p p mat nt" complaint would ha lhi NCR which severely af ct. it is submitted that the co r the eyes of law as the I lle Authority with clean naterial facts relates to tlt has approached the Hon' has suppressed and :edings which have direct orted complaint and if rial facts and proceedir p not arising in view of Page 14 of26 of 2022 & in March 2020 which ly affected ntly respondent was able to control e as the same was beyond imposed in the year 2t which badly affected the const on and able to handover the possession the control of the respo ent. imposed by the' Hon e supreme ue to the alarming levels f pollution the ongoing constr n of the aint is not maintainabl or tenable mplainant has not app ched this nds and has not disc the true s case of complaint.

The mplainant, hands and facts and inability of e Authority with unclea ncealed the material bearing on the very main there had been discl of these ining the gs the question of en e case law i. ffiHARE #"eunue titled non- onn and r Com Complaint No.

L1 of 2022 & ors. in which the Hon'tl e Apex Court of the land fpined that isclosure of material fa and documents amounts to a fraud but also upon the Hon'ble AuthoritY t only the opposite party bsequently the same vi ission in case titled as was taken by even Hon'$le National ,ithout admitting or ac ions advanced by the owledging the truth or le$ality of the mplainant an lainant and without prejudice to ,ntentions of the resporl rcrvisions of the Act zt ent, it is respectfully sulmitted that er submitted that merel not retrospective in nature.

The undo or modify the terms of an to coming into effect of the Act.

It is because the Act aPPlies to ongoing t:s which registered wi the Authority, the Act cannot be said .

The provisions of the Act relied upon refund, interest and comPensation operating retrospectivel e Complainant seeking t be called into aid i derogation and ignor{nce of the ions of the Builder Buy' r's Agreement.

It is furth{r submitted k.

That alleg the < the prov agre furtt Projr to bt byl canr pro\ that isb canl sions of the Act canno :rrrent duly executed Pricr thr: interest for the allege :yond the scope of the delay demanded by the ComPlainant uyer's Agreemenl..

The ComPlainant compensation beyond the terms and of demand any interest Page 15 of26 ffiHARE #-eunue cond in vi CASC ic,ns incorPorated in ther of the law as laid down titled as oter/develoPer has been it is submitted that ttirnce of PaYment of ins lopment of the Proiecl: o:sed allottees defaulted n, the failure has a casca for proper execution reas enormous business structed the Project in q ilder Buyer's Agreem However, by the Hon'ble BombaY H Court in pro offe RE pro abo re an d p u o1[ possession while co plying the Provision of ion 3 of Act as it was oPined th the said Act named RE is having ve effect instead of ective.

Para No.86 a d 119 of the e :;aid citation are very nI relevant in this regard the li given U /s 4 to intimate to the h date of possible.

The to deliverY, a,n indispensable recl irement for concePtu allottees defaul in timelY lment which was an ntial, crucial tion and in question.

Furthermo , when the their paYment as Per ule agreed ing effecting on the ion and the f the project increase xponentiallY losses befall uPon the ndent. the ndent.

The ndent, desPite the defa It of several allottees has iligently and est pursued the develo;: ent of the Project in qu on and has eal CO CO estion as exPeditiouslY of20ZZ & ion of the Projecr is completed and read Page 16 of26 of2022 & vhich is likely to bel completed by the such taxes, which are still beyond the ;pecifically mentioned in Clause 7 & B rent, vide which Complainants were basic sale price of the said unit )ay EDC, IDC together with all the and other charges inclusive of all 3uarantees for EDC:, IDC or any other mplainant further agreed to pay his ure enhancement/radditional demand se charges even if such additional s been executed. ts have been filed and placed on the dispute.

Hence, thr: complaint can be lisputed documents and submission rction of complaint on ty observes that it has adjudicate the present ing reje authori ict iur W. ard the sdir rega rd.

T iuris PageLT of26 ion to E.

I T awai year appli inte statu prop raise ntral Government leviecl con I r:f the respondent, it is of th Eiuilder Buyer's Ag ag to pay in addition he/s e/they is/are liable to ng occupancy certificate jit2.

Lrle interest, incidental t on the requisite bank ory demand etc.

The Co rtionate share in any fu lcy authorities for th : for the reasons given bel rritorial i urisdiction dem nd raise after sale deed Copies o all the relevant docume record. decided eir authenticity is not in n the basis of these un made by he parties. on of the authority The app cation of the responden jr-rrisdiction stands rej territori complai ars well as subject matte ffiHAII ffi.eunu m.

The 13.

E.

14. f urisd ground 15. ffiHAI ffi.eun As per E.

II 16.

1.7.

Town an Regulato purpose project i of obli tification no.

1/92/201 Ccluntry Planning Depa Authority, Gurugram s ith offices situated in I question is situated wi herefore, this authority 1h District. deal with he present complaint. complaint. ect matter iurisdiction Section 1(,+)[a) of the Act, 2016t responsi le to thel allottee as per reprodu as hereunder: 11 iit promoter shall- 34-Functions of the So, in v compl jurisdiction to decide thL ions by the promoter IeaL decided later the adjudicating offic,e if pursued by the com Page 18 of26 of 2022 & -1TCP dated L4.1,2.201 issued by ent, the jurisdiction of I Estate ll be entire Gurugram for all urugram.

In the p case, the Gurugram in the planning area o s complete territorial j iction to provides that the Promo shall be ment for sale.

Sectio 11(a)(a) is ions, responsibilities and ft or the rules and regulations the agreement for sale, or moy be, till the conveyonce the cose may be, to the tion of allottees or the com compliance of the obli, and the real estate agents thereunder.

Act quoted above, the a thority has complaint regarding no mpliance ing aside compensation ich is to be nants at a made r.o the tll the es, or cast this ffiHAREr{: ffi- eunuenAu Findings on objections raised maieure conditions.

The respondent/promoter has construction of the project was ba dated 16.07 .201,2,, 31,.07 .2012 ancl Haryana High Court duly passed i through which the shucking /extr the backbone of construction pro dates passed by the l-lon'ble Nation the excavation work causing Air harmful to the public at large with these the demonetization is also ott possession to the home buyer:; stoppage of work in many projects to only bjuy liquid cash.

The su respondelrrt unable to cope with t respondent was cletermined to ca the builder buyer: agreement but imposed lthroughout the country in construction and consequently res; possessi(n on time as the sa respondent.

The due date accord calculated from the date of sanctio later which comes out to CR/137q /2022 wherein the due I allotment i,u., 15.09.201-4 being la F.

LL of 2022 & ors. the respondent regarding force raised the contention that the ly affected on account of the orders 21,.08. rs 21,.08.2012 of the Hon'ble Punjab & civil writ petition no.20032 of 200u tion of water was banned which is , simultaneously orders at different Green Tribunal restraining thereby ualiry Index being worNe, may be ut admitting any liability.

Apart from of the main factors to delay in giving as demonetization caused abrupt The payments especially to workers n restriction on withdrawals led the Le labour pressure.

Furthermore, the his business in letter alnd spirit of ue to COVID"19 the lockdown was March 2020 whichr badly affected the ondent was not atlle to handover the was beyond the confrol of the ng to clause 26 ctf the allotment is of building plan i.e,., 11.09.2013 being L1,.09.2016 except in case no. date is calculated from the date of r accordingly in this particular case Page t9 of26 ffiHARE[{,- ffieunuenhrrl the due dat,e of possession comes which incurred before the due da clause of the allotment latter may granting the grace period for co quoted by the respondent in its rerl circumstances are after the lapse o ban on construction activities by th months $nly.

Furthermore, auth clause is of the considerate view t talk aboult the grace period and ac denying the grace period on accol-l the project while calculating the d due date pf possession remains as I G.

Findingslon the relief sought by I G.I DPC &IPOSSESSION 19.

In the prpsent complaint, the com project and is seeking delayed p interest on the amount paid.

Clau allotment) provides for handlng below: '26 l.he tleveloper shall oJfer period of 36 months from the date of execution of allotment folce mojeure circumstonces suc cillil commotion, wor, riot, explo silprtage of energy labour equ falilure of transportation, strike, dippute with any controctor/, d$veloper, change of law, or any Page 2O of 26 Complaint No.

11 of 2022 & ors. out to be 15.09.2077.

A(ty instance of possession as per the relevant considered by tlhe authority while pletion of the project. e project.

The reasons ly to be consider€rd as force majeure due date of posse:ssion.

As far as the NGT are concerned they ]are for two ity while going by the possession at the possession clause ifself do not rdingly, the authority has no hitch in t of force majeure for completion of e date of possession.

Therefore, the entioned above, complainants. lainant intends to continue with the session charges at prescrfbed rate of 26 of the allotment letter [in short, er of possession and is reproduced of the unit any time, w\thin o e of sanction of building plans or Ietter, whichever is later subject to os act of god, fire, earthquakff flood, 'n, terrorist octs, sabotage, or generol pment facilities material o sypplies, lockouts, action of labour uniqn, any struction ogency appointed by the t.ice, order, rule or notificatiorl issued ffiHAI?E #-eunue 20.

At the o the a terms complai agreem docume and in but so h that ev docume possessi commit incorpo just to deprive just to and dra left with Admiss complai them at under: 21,. any co u rts/ tri bu n a I s and / o r intervention of statutory aut e c'ontrol of the developer. mpensation on the grounds sons beyond the control of tset, it is relevant to com ment wherein the po conditions of this ants not being in de ts and compliance tation as prescribed by ration of such condil.i avily loaded in favour o a single default by th tations etc. as prescri n clause irrelevant fo nt date for handing tion of such clause in th ade the liability toward e allottee of his right mment as to how the bui ed such mischievous cla no option but to sign on lity of DPC along wi ant is seeking delay pos allottee(s) shall not be developer." he prescribed rate of int Rule 15 has been Page 27 of 26 Complaint No.

1, of 2022 & ny other public or competent a thority ies, or any other reason(s) beyond deloy in offering possession to ony due to nt on the preset posses ion clause of sion has been subjected all kinds of n, and the reement and atrlplicat ult u icat ult under any provisio ith all provisions, fo e promoter.

The dr:afting ns are not only vague a the promoter and again allottee in fulfilling fo ' by the promoter m the purpose of allott er possession loses its eaning.

The promoter is unit and to buyer's agreement by th timely delivery of subj ing after delay in ion.

This is der has misused his domi ant position se in the agreement and e dotted lines. s of these alities and f this clause d uncertain the allottee lities and make the s and the e allottee is prescribed rate of i terest: The ession charges on the a unt paid by produced as l\ll 22. ffiHARE #* gunugr Complaint No.

11 of 2022 & ors. e subordinate le6;islation under the s determined the prescribed rate of determined by the legislature, is bllowed to award the interest, it will SCS.

1t (1 .15.

Prescribed rate of in st- [Proviso to section 72, section and sub-section $) and (7) of section 191 );or the purpose of Proviso to section 1"2; sectiort 18; and sub- :tections (4) and (7) of 'tion L9, the "intere,st at the rate Bank of lndia highest marginol cost prescribed" shall be the Sta of lending rate +20/0.: State Bank of lndia morginallcost of Provided thot in case iending rate (ltlCLRJ is n ,benchmark lending rates in use, it shall be rePlaced bY such ich the State Bank of India tltaY fix to the general Public.

23.

Consequently, as Per website http-s;l/shi;:o.in, the marginal cost date i.e., 03.05.2023 is 8.70o/o.

Acc:< of the State Bzrnk of India i.e., of lending rate (in short, MCLR) as on rdingly, the prescribed rate of interest +Zo/o i.e., LO.7Oo/o. defined under section Z(za) of the Act chargeable from the allottee by the be equal to the rate of interest which y the allottee, in r:ase of default.

The of interest payable by the prorfoter or f this clause- e from the allottee by the prorttoter, in ual to the rate of interest which the ey the allottee, in cose of default; promoter to the allot,l,ee shall be from the amount or onY Part thPreof till part till part thereof and interest thereon is ble by the allottee' to the promoter will be marlJinal cost of lending rattr 24.

The definition of term 'interest' a:; provides ttrat the rate of interes;l promoter, in case of default, shall the promoler shall be liable to Pi relevant ser:tion is reproduced belc "(zo-l "interest" means the rates the ullottee, os the case maY be' llxPlanation. -For the PurPose t (i) the rate of interest chargeo' case o.f default, shall be er promoter shall be liable to P (ii) the interest PaYable bY the the date the Promoter rec,e the date the amount or refunded, qnd the interest Page22 of 26 ffi& 25.

GUR HARE sltoll be from the dote the promoter till the date it is pa Therefore, irtterest on the delay pa charged at tre prescribed rate i.e., which is the same as is being gr delayed l;ession charges.

26.

On consideration of the documen made regarrling contravention of satisfied that the respondent is in the Act not handing over pos agreemerfit.

By virtue of clause between I the parties on 24.09.2 apartmerft was to be delivered execution oI allotment or sanctio The due date is calculated from th 11.09.20tr3, being later.

Accordin 11.09.20X,6.

Therefore, the due 11.09.20t6 except in case no.

CR calculated from the date of all accordinfuly in this particular case be 15.09 ,201,7 .

The respondent h subject {nit:.

Accordingly, it is the fulfil its obligations and responsi over thei possession within the st complia4ce of the mandate cont proviso [o section 1B(1) of the Page23 of26 Complaint No.

1L of 2022 & ors, allottee defaults in payment po the ents from the complainants shall be 0.7 Oo/o by the respondent/promoter nted to the complainant! in case of available on record and submissions visions of the Act, the futhoritY is ntravention of the section 11(a)(a) of sion by the due date as Per the 6 of the allotment letter executed 12, the possession of the subject ithin 36 months from the date of of building plans whichever is later. is later. date of approval of building plans i.e., y, period of 36 rnonths exPired on ate of handing over Possession is L378/2022 wherein the due date is tment i.e., 1.5.09.2014 being later e due date of possession comes out to not yet offered the possession of the ilure of the respondent/promoter to ilities as per the agreempnt to hand pulated period.

Accordin$ly, the non- ined in section tt(a)[a] read with on the part of the r(sPondent is Complaint No, lL of 2022 & ors. all be paid, by the promoqer, interest date of possessirln i.e., 1'1.09.2016 wherein the due date is calculated '.201.4 being later accordingly in this ssion comes out to be L5.09.2017 ttll r valid offer of possessi{n plus two competent authoriry aq Prescribed to section 1B[1) of the Act read with mpensation in the above-mentioned hat it is important to understand that rest and comPensation as seParate allottee can claim.

For claiming 4, IB and section 19 of the Act, the mplaint before Adiudic{ting Officer 7t of the Act and rule 29 olt the rules, this order and i:SSU€S the following : to ensure compliance of obligations e function entrusted to tfre authority pay the interest at the prescribed rate ry month of delaY on the amount Paid ate of possession i.e., 1,1..09.2016 except 'herein the due date is calculated from Page 24 of 26 I-IARIR, GURUGRAI!] established.

As such the allottees sl for every month of delay from du except in case no.

CR/1378/2022 from the dal.e of allotment i.e., 15.0 particular czrse the due date of poss actual handt.ng over of possession months after obtaining OC from t.t rate i.e., 10.:/0 0/o p.a. as per provist rule 15 of the rules.

G.ll Cost of litigation The complzrinants are claiming cc reliefs.

The authoriry is of the vierar the Act has clearlY Provided intr entitlement /rights which the compensation under sections 12, complainants may file a seParate under sectir:n 3 L read with sectiott Directions of the authoritY I-lence, the authority hereby pass( directions under ons under section 37 of the I cast upon the Promoter as Per th under sectirn 3a[Q: i.

The respondent is directed tc i.e., 1 0,700/o Per annum for ev, by the comPlainant from due t in case no.

CR/1378/2O22 t ffi #_ 27.

H.

28.

Complaint No. lX. of 2022 & ors.

Ic"-plr@ URUGRATVI L OTS -] the dater of allotment i.e., 15.09.2014 being later accordingly in this particulrrr case the due date of'forr.rrion comes outto be 15.09.201,7 till actual handing over of porr[rsion or valid offer of possession plus two rncnths after obtaining Pa from the competent authority at prescribed rate i.e., 10.70 o/o p,4.as per proviso to section 1B(1) of the Act read with rule 15 of the rutJr.

The arrr:ars of such interest ,J..r.a from 1,L0g.2016 except in case no.

CR/ 1378/202,2 wherein the due date comes out to be 15.09.2017 till the clate of order by the autfrority shall be paid by the promoter to the alloltee within a perioa of eO days from date of this order and interest for every month of delfV shall be paid by the promoter to the allottee before 10th of the subsequent month as per rule L6(2) of the rules.

The cornplainant is directea Jo pay outstanding dues, if any, after adjustment of interest for the dflafed period.

The rate of interest chargeable from the complainant/allottees by the prornotr:r, in case of default shlll be charged at the prescribed rate i.e., 1.0.7Ao/o by the respondent/lromoter which is the same rate of interest which the promoter slall be liable to pay the allottees, in case of defaurlt i.e., the delay possesf ion charges as per section Z(za) of the Act.

If there is no amount outstanding against the allottees or less amount outstanding against the ,ttott[., then the balance delay possession charges shall be paid after adjilstment of the outstanding against the allottees.

Page 25 of26 ffiH #-e ii. iii. iv.

V. ffiH #-e vi.

29.

30.

3L.

ARE URUG The pondent shall cha is part of the buyer' ag not charged by the p part f agreement as per law ap I no.

3864-3889 /2 20.

889 /2 20.

This d on shall mutatis utand of this or 'fhe com placed o Files be aints stand dis the case file of nsigned to regist er. [Ashok an) M H Dated: 0 .05.2023 ryaUa Ileal Estate egul of 2022 & anything from thel compl nant which ent.

However, holding rges shall at any point of time after being ttled by Hon'ble Supreme rt in civil s apply to cases mentio in para 3 certified copies of order be \,.t - (Viiay I{ Miember ry Authority, Gurugram Page26 of26