SANIL SANAN AND KAMNA SANAN THROUGH SH RAJ KUMAR SETH vs VATIKA LTD

UAIES& ffi, GUI?UGI?AM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM: Complaint no.

Date of complaint Fi.rt date of hearirf l0l2 of 202 - 1L.03.2022 09fr&zon 20.09.2023 Date of decision Complainants Respondent Shri Ashok liangwan Member APPEARANC|E: Shri Kanish Bangia Advocate Complainants Mr.

Dhruv Dutt Sharma Advocate Respondent ORDER 1.

The presernt complaint has been filed by t e complainants/allottees under Section 3 L of the Real Estate [Reg Iation and Development) 4ct,2016 (in short, the Act) read with ru e 29 of'the Haryana Real 1|l 1.012 of Z0 Sanil Sanan & Kamna Sanan R/O: !2,1't Floor, Shakti Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi.

M/S Vatika Ltd.

Registered address at Vatika Triangle, Floor, Sushant Lok, phase Il Block A, t4i Gurugrirm -LZZ\OZ.

Estate fRr:gulation and Development) R RulesJ for violarion of section lI(4)(aJ of alia prescribed that the promoter shal obligationr;, responsibil iti es, and functi ons Act or the rules and regulations made the les, 201,7 (in short, the e Act wherein it is inter be re,sponsible for all nder ttre provision of the under or to the allottees se. as per the agreement for sale executed inte Page 1 of 1(r /- ffiunRERA E;m,- ffi GURuGttAM , __r A.

Unit and project_related details 2' The particurars of the projec! the detairs of sare consideration, the amount paid by the comprainants, the date of proposed handing over.of the possession, and the deray period, if any,hayr: been detaired in r he foll owing; tabular form : ions by,Vatika ntial pl,otted colony 2 acres ll dared 16.09.2011 to 15.09.2024 fins Pvt Ltd istered 01.9 SG-02 B-S..Io.-ABB, plor H-24, Top level .28 of complaintJ ge no.28 ofthe rl 6 26 of complaint) loper based on its ns ancl estimates and all just exceptions ParticuliE Name@ Nature of ttre pro;ect DiICP ticense no Valid u Name orticeniG Shiva Unit no.

RERA nelGter@- noI 21.7 of PIot no. no. '1,9, [Page n Unitarea;dile;*C Date @ builder buyer agreement [suprer areaJ 1350 sq. [As per complai 21..06. ai 21..06.20 (Page no.

Possr:ssion .truru present p 13.

Poss The d subject Page 2 of 16 ffi UASEM GURUGI?AM lates .orrptetifi tjG rction of the s;rid tial floor within a peri:)d months from the date rrf tion of BBA unless ther.e be delay or there shall be a due to reasons meniloned er clauses herein or due to of allottees to pay in time of the said residentiill Iong with all other charges es in accordance with the Ie of payments given irr e-l or as per the demand:; by the rieveloper from timr,r or an,y failure on part ol, to abide by any term:; ions r:f the agreement. fiom the date ot. agreement plus 6 periodl in lieu of Covid- Ls3 /.. nct.92 of the Reply) B.

Facts of ttrE compfairn Page 3 of16 lcolplaint No.

1012 of 202;: I 2L.L2.2020 Rs.

3'J.,35,567 /- [As per Frtu no.92 of the Reply) Due date of possession Total srle .orsiddrti,on Amount pria- Uy tt,e 12.06.2423 Offerr of possession Not offefed 4 5.

6.

7. ffi ffi illq{c ilrd ffiHAREI S* GL;RUgi 3.

The con wherein "Xpressic Respondr t.

Assured t on their ci no.

HSG-0 of 1350 sr form datel, complainre Rs.2,00,0[ On 21,.06.',2 Vatika Ltd complainar within 48 r:: Following 1 -\ dr (& Af\l rplainants were a[ they extended the rns by Vatika,, and r lnt's project. ry the promises anc rndid representatio 29, Plot No.-1"9, ST.

1. ft., in the said pro d 1.2.04.2016 was e nts, in lieu of which )0/- as token mone\ ',0L6, a builder-buyr . and the complait :ts that the posses nonths.

The total cot layments were mac rproached b, rosy picture rctuated the I inducement ns, the comp H-24, Top L rject.

In furth xecuted betv the complair g in respect c :r agreemenl nants.

Furth sion of the s nsideration v le by the corn Complainr No.

1,012 of 202 ' the builder i.e.

Vatika L of their forthcoming vent :ompla,lnants to invest in ofthe respondent and bas ainants booked a flat, beari lvel, and having a super ar )rance of this, an applicatir ,een M7's Vatika Ltd. and tl Lants advanced an amount I booking the said flat. said flat. was executed between M7 lr, it was promised to th aid flat would be provide 'as agreed at Rs.B.l_,7 9,5131 plainants: 2.

J.

T S. no l.

Date Mode Of Pavment Amount -_ Rs.200000/- Rs.1248000/ Rs.65l9ll- _ Rs.1622376r 19.04.20r6 Cheque- 0823 I 3 19.05.2016 Cheque- 0823 I 5 27.06.2017 RTGSAIEFT 24.01.20t8 RTGSNEFT As per clau assured the, said unit anLr from the de se 13 of the builder buyer agreen complainants that the responden J shall handover the possession o1 rte of signing of the agreement, lnt, "the respondent had will soon construct the the period of 4g months However, to date, no Page 4 of 16 Lr:d., tr-rre r:he asr:d rring aroa rtir; n Itlre rt of ,,S trl rl t/ |.lARERA GUI?UGI?AM possession or allotment Ietter whatsoever complainants.

8.

As per r:lause lg of the Agreement, ,,it w that if the respondent fails to handover th within the stipulated time as agreed in cl the respr:ndent will pay compensation up t ft. of ther sppsl area of the unit per month after the expiry of 60 days from the stipul possession".

The respondent has neglected to the cornplainants and has wilfully put 9.

The respondent miserably neglected possession of the said unit to the complaina of the unit is still ongoing and will take al completed.

10.

A legal norice dated A4.09.2021 demandi along with derayed interest was sent to the respondent has neither responded to the I over the possession to the complainants.

C.

Relief soulght by the complainanB: 11.

The complainants have sought the following i' Direct the respondent to refund the enti the prescribed rate of interest.

D.

Reply by rerspondent: L2.

The unit in qluestion was booked by Mr.

Sanil and Mrs.

Kalnna Sanan.

However, the presen fr as been handed over to the, agreed between the parties possession of the said unit 14 of the agreement, then a maximum of Rs.750 sq. the period of such delay ed date for delivery of the to pay the delayed interest L in a jeop ardized situation hand over the physici;l ts to date. s to date.

The constructiorr st another 4-S years to ge I a refund of the said unit pondent but to date, the I notice nor has handecl relief(s): paid iamount along with nan, Mrs.

Vanita Sanan, complilint has been filed /l/ Page 5 of L6 aint N1 1.0L2 of 202l ,) ffiHARERA ffi cURuGttAM by only Mr.

Sanil Sanan and Mrs.

Kamna Iiable to be dismissed on account of non_ 13.

No such agreement, as referred to under and 20I'7 Haryana Rules, has been exec; and the complainant.

Rather, the agreem to get the adjudication of the complain! the flat b,uyer,s agreement, executed muc the 201,7 Haryana rules.

14.

That the complainant has miserably a payments in time by the terms of the complainarnt has frustrated the terms and agreement, which were the essence of th parties.

15.

It was agr,eed between the parties that s having complied with all the terms and agreement and not being in default under said agreement and having complied with documentation, etc., the developer construction of the said residential floor months from the date of execution of the agt be delay due to force majeure events and fai time the price of the said residential floor.

16.

As per clause L6 ofthe BBA, it had been a due to reasons beyond the control of the De shall be automatically entitled to the extens possession.

Further, the developer may als such a period as it may consider expedient.

Complaint No. nan, and as such the same is inder of necessary party. e provisions of the 2015 /rct ted between the respondernt nt that has been referred to, ough without jurisdiction, is before coming into force rlf d wilfully failed to malie at buyer's agreement.

The nditions of the flat buyer,s arran€Jement between thr: bject to the complainant:; conditions of the buyer,r; ny of the provisions of the all pro'risions, formalities ntemplates completing nit wit,hin a period of 48 menL unless there shall ure of allottee(sJ to pay in that jin case the delay is Ioper then the developer n of fime for delivery of suspend the pro nd the project for 1,01,2 of 202l ') Page 6 of t6 HARERA GUl?UGl?AM Due to several force majeure condition same are as follows; (i) Introduction of a new National High (ii)The Hon'ble National Green Tribunal Control Aurhoriry tEpCA) issued di deterioration in Air Quality in the Del (iii)lmplemenration of MNREGA Schemes the construction industry as a whole Iabor supply. (iv)Disruptions caused in the supply of s to orders passed by the Hon,ble Sup High Court of punjab and Ha contractors in and around Haryana. (v) Disruptions caused by unusually heavy (vi)Financ;ial crunch in the real estate secto (vii) Disrupdons and delays caused in the su to various large_scale agitations organi (viii)Declaration of Gurgaon as a Notified Groundwater and restrictions imposed by extraction for construction purposes. (ix) The Government of India imposed a lo 2020 to curb the spread of the Covid_L9 I 18.

The complaiinants have failed to make paym with the terms and conditions as well as submitted that out of the sale consideratio ffi 17. amount actually paid by the complainanB PageT of16 the project got delayed, l:he 352 tN.

GTJ/Einvironment polluti on ives and measures to counl.er i-NCR region. by the Central Governmen:t, as been facing a shortage of ne and sand aggregat€, due me Court and the Hon,bie a prohibiting mining blr ins in Gurgaon. ply of cornent and steel due in Ha:ryana.

Area fbr the purpose ol. state government on its kdown in India in March ndemlc. nts in time in accordance the payment plan.

It is of Rs.

81,,64,L53/_, the s Rs.

31,35,567.54/- i.e. .)/ ffiTNRERA ffi.. ct.,lRtlgtAM around 380/o of the total consideration after defaulting in complying with the buyer's agreement, now want to shift respondent whereas the respondent has such defaulters Iike the present complai, |urisdiction of the authority: The plea of the respondents regarding la is rejected.

The authority observes that E.

1,9. subject matter jurisdicion to adludiiate t reasons given below.

E. below.

E.

I Territorial jurisdiction As per notifi6211on no. l/g2/ZO1,T_LTCI Town and Country planning Department, Regulator.yz Authority, Gurugram shall be for all purposes with offices situated in Gu the project in question is situated within th district.

Therefore, this authority has compl deal with the present complaint.

II Subjer:t matter jurisdiction Section Lll:.4)[al of the Act, 2016 provides responsible to the allottee as per the 11(4)[aJ is reproduced as hereunder: Section 11(+)(a) Be rlsyonsible for. alt obligations, responsibilities, lii:,::::'^!f tnil.Act or thi rutes'and resutariinr-', ,,'rli" tii'i Page B of 16 ,V Complaint rvo. rOrzlr ZOnl f the unit.

The complainar:rts terms and conditions of the e burden on the part of the ffered a lot financially duerto nts. of jurisdiction of Authori ty it has territorial as well as e present complaint for tl: e lated 1,4.1.2.20L7 issued b,7 e jurisdiction of Real Estatr-, e entire Gurugram Distri(:l ram.

In the present caso, planning area of Gurugran L e territorial jurisdiction tr: ther promoter shall be ent for sale.

Section nd func:tions under the thereunder or to the tion o.)" allottees, as the case may be, till the conveyance of all the apartm case may be, to the allofteLs, or thlii^^o, areas or the competunt authoriet, i, in', ,rrl may be; Section 34-Functions of the Authority: 34(f) of the Act provides to ensure compliance with promoters, the allottees, and the real)stutu agent: and regulations made thereuntder.-"' " So, given the provisions of the Act quot complete jurisdiction to decide the compliance of obligations by the promoter which is to be der:ided by the adjudicati complainant at a later stage.

F.

Findings on the objections raised by the regarding jurisdiction of buyer's agreement executed F.I. ffiHNRERA ffi ouluglAM Objection apartment of the Act.

20. e Act.

20.

The respondent submitted that the compla nor tenable, 2n6 is Iiable to be outrightly d buyer's agreement was executed betwee enactment of the Act and the provision of the retrospectiv'ely.

21,.

The authority is of the view that the provis retroactive to some extent in operation agreements ;[or sale entered into even prior the Act where the transaction are still in the p Act nowhere provides, nor can be so co agreements would be re_written after comi Therefore, the provisions of the Act, rures a Page 9 of 16 /!

ComplaintNo.

1012 of ZOn'l, ts,.plot.s or buildings, as the ,the as:;ociation of allottees he obligations cast upon the under th,is Act and the rules d above, the authority has mplaint regarding non_ leaving aside compensation officerr if pursued by the ondents: e complaint efore coming w.r.t the into forcer t is nerither maintainable missecl as the apartment 'the parties before the id Act cannot be applied ons of the Act ar.e quasi_ nd would apply to the coming into oper.ation of of completion.

The trued, that all previous g into force of the Act. agre€)ment have to be ffiHNRERA ffi oultlqtAM 22.

1l of 202 Complaint No.

1.012 read ancl interpreted harmoniously.

Ho for dearling with certain specific specific/particular manner, then that si accordance with the Act and the rules afte of the Act and the rules.

Numerous p provisions of the agreements made be said contention has been upheld in Neelkamttl Realtors Suburban pW.

Ltd.

2737 of 2017) decid,ed on 06.1 2.20L7 and "1Lg.

IJnder the provisions of Section 78, t possession ytould be counted from a,greement _for sale entured into by the p,,:: : ::, tt .,reg.istra tio, u n a u i t"iA."'U, tlle fr?motyr_is given a facility to rt p roject and declare the'same-r;;;; ctrntemplatet rewriting of contra,c:t the promoter...

122.

We have already discussed that above are not retrospective in nature. in nature.

They a retroactiv€,ot our -' "ter ;; ii :"i' i i' ; ;, ; :; J ;i :;?,,:i ; ffi, " Parliament is c( r e t r o s p e c t i * o r r, I 1orl'rffrt r;;: y i, -A/C l::,:::,:!,f. elistino contractuat rishts t ';;n'^'::::',:^':':"n Y: dy not haie anv Ishwer Singh Dahiya,in the order dated 17.

Estate Appellate Tribunal has observed_ "34. ,!ut,. .keep_ing .in view our aforesoid di: considered opinion that tne provisions ever, if the Act has provided provisions/situation in a tion will be dealt with in the date of coming into forr:e isions of the Act save the the buyers and sellers.

The re landmark judgment rtrf Vs.

Uil and others. (W.to hich p,lsyides as under: dely in honding over the ? ctate meniloned in the and the allottee e1the. provisions of RERA, !!: lry,, of_comptetion of 4.

Tlte REM does not the flat purchaser and !.ry has been framed in ,nitr"rii, piilt sludy and discussion made at the hion, interest after a thorough ;t level by the Standing Cornmittee and Selec, ci^i-irirr,'*T'i submitted i* detailed to some extent be having t then on that ground thZ not be challenged.

The legislate law having be even, framed tu ayeit ween tl\e parties in the bt in our mind that the 2.2019 the Haryana Real provi,sions of the REM trye are of the Act are quasi reports." AIso, in appeal no.

1 73 of Zll,gtitled tulagic Developer pvt.

Vs. ssion, f the retrooctive to some extent,i io[rri"rTra Page 10 of16 ffiHNRERA ffi- GUIIUGI?AM Hence in c_ase of delay in the offer/r terms and conditions of the ,;;;r; entitled to the intirertTaltiyri reasonable ratu of interrri o, iori . _"vv:.:u.c , uLy uJ rncerest as provi, one.sided, uffiir and unreasorlOii, in the agreement for sale is liabte io 23.

The agreements are sacrosand save a which have been abrogated by the Act itse builder-buyer agreements have been execl is no scope left to the allottee to negotiate therein. e therein.

Therefore, the authority is of the under various heads shall be payable ; qrrqur var ruus ueaos shall be payable as conditionr; of the agreement subject to the in accordatnce withL the plans/permissions departme,ts/competent authorities and : any other Act, rules and regulations ma unreasonable or exorbitant in nature.

Hen mentioned reasons, the contention of the stands rejected.

F.II Objections regarding force Majeure 24' The respondent-promoter has raised construction of the tower in which the u situated, has been delayed due to force maj orders passed by the Hon,ble SC to stop co Municipal corporations Gurugram, etc.

T regarding various orders of the SC, etc., and this regard are devoid of merit.

The orde construction in the NCR region were for a ve thus, cannot be said to impact the responden Page 11 of 16 ,/ ComplaintNo, 1.012 of 20ZI| ivery of lto.ssessron as per the t for sale the allottee sholl be charges on the in_Rule tS of ihe rules and of co m pensation me nti o ned ignored." except for the provisions .

Further, it is noted that t,he ted in the manner that ther.e ny of the clauses containod ew that the charges payable per the agreed terms anrl nditircn that the Sdffle zrr] proved by the respectivt: not in contravention c I e thererunder and are nol; , in thr: Iight of the above. pondent w.r.t. jurisdictiorr e contention that the it of the complainant is re circumstances such as ction, notification of the plea of the respondent all the pleas advanced in passerd by SC banning short period of time and builder leading to such a ffiHNRERA W. eunuennH,r delayin the completion.

Thus, the promo any Ieniency on the basis of aforesaid re notificat:ion no. g/S_2020 dated Z months is granted for the projects or after 25,0J.2020.

The due date for the being allotted to the complainant is 2L Therefore, an extension of 6 months is to due date of handing over possession in 2020 dated 26.05.2020, on"i.ount of fo the outbreak of the Covid-L9 pandemic. pandemic.

S omes out F.III Objection regarding non_joinder of 25.

The respondent contended that the unit i three allottees, namely Mr.

Sanil Sanan, Kamna SanLan, but the complaint was filed Mrs.

Kamn,a Sanan, and hence the said com on the ground of non_joinder of necessary raised on the proceeding dated L0.1,1,.2020 complainants submitted additional docu 20.07.2023 vide which rhey informed that vanita sanan (Mother of Mr.

Sanir Sanan & on 1.4.04.20,21, as per the death certificate.

F share of Mrs.

Vanita Sanan devolves to her Sanil Sanan & Mrs. pooja Sanan.

The compl duly executed NOC dared 06.03.2023 sign whereby she states that she relinquishes he Page !2 of 16 r respondent cannot be given ns.

Fu'rther as per HAREI?A 2020, an extension of 6 completion/due date,on ssession of the subject ut; it 2020 i.e., after 25.03.2020. e given over and above the iew of notification no. g /,,:t_ majeurre conditions due l;c , in such case, the due datr: 21.12.2020. ry parties. question was booked bv Van,ita Sanan, and Mrs. nly by lVIr.

Sanil Sanan ana laint sihould be dismissed rties.

The said issue was .

Though thereafter, the nts to the Authority on of the co-allottees Mrs. rs.

Pooja Sanan), demised rther, it is noted that the children, namely Mr. inants have submitted a d by Mrs. pooja Sanan, claim against the unit in 1 t omplaint No.

1012 of 2021t I HASEE GU,?UGI.IAM question.

Thus, in view of the above, complaint has been duly filed.

G.

Entitlement of the complainant for G.I Direct the respondent to refund the complainant along with interest at the 26.

The complainanB were allotted plot no.

L9, St.

H-Z4,top level in the project,,Xpress Haryana by the rerspondent/builder for i 81.,64,L53,r-.

The possession of the unit months from the date of the execution of th the due date of possession comes out to be month period in Iieu of Covid 19J.

The obtained only on 1_1l.06.2023.It has come total sale cc,nsideration of Rs.

81.,64,L53/_, a sum of Rs, 31,35,56 7 /_ to the respondent. espondent. contended that the unit was not offered to : case allottees wish to withdraw from the prr on demand to return the amount received by at the prescribed rate if it fails;; ;;, possession of the unit in accordance with for sale.

This view was taken by the Hon,ble the cases of Newtech promoters and De State of U.p. and Ors. (supra) reiterated i, Realtors private Limited & other vs. (lnion (Civil) (supra) wherein it was observed as u ,,The unq.ultifed right of the allottees referred Under Seclion ia5g6o1 and Sec Comprlaint No.

1,012 of 20! e Authority finds that Lhe mount deposited by the rescritled rate.

G-028-Sector-BBB, plot nr:,. ns", Sector BBB, Gurugranr, total consideration of R:;, s to br: offered within 4tl buyer's agreement.

Hence, 7.12.2020 flncludin g a 6. patjion certificate was n record that against the comprlainants have paid owever, the complainants m despite this.

Hence, in the promoter is liable e promoter with interest te or is unable to give terms of the agreement prerle Court of India in Pr,ivate Limited vs. the ccrse of M/s Sana of India & others SLp er: - seek r,efund 1e(4) of the Page 13 oft6 ,1/ ffiFNRERA ffiGUnUGrtAM A,ct is n_ot dependent on any contir, there.o! _tt appears ,no, in, Ui'i, yyviae.! . tnil risht ,f ,rf,;; unconditional absolute' ,igit io llo.,!?rff f?i.ls to give possession of t, outtcttng within the time stipulatei u ag reement reg ardless of unforeseen of the Court/Tribunai, which ; attributable to the allottees/ho*, O un.der an obligation to refunid th, o^ interest ot tie rarc prescribed by including compensation in the min Ac.t,w.ith the proviso tnat i1 tne artio,i withdraw from the projeci n, ,iotti for the period of delay tili noraingl rate prescribed,'.

27 ' The prorrroter is responsibre for ail obri functions under the provisions of the A regulations made thereunder or to the al for sale under section LI(4)[aJ of the Act. f the Act. complete rtr is unable to give possession of the terms of the agreement for sale or d specified therein.

Arccordingly, the promote he wishes to withdraw from the project, wi remedy available, to return the respondents/prom'ter in respect of the un as may be p,1s5s1ibed.

28.

It is contended on behalf of the responden project it robtained the occupation certifi authority on L2.06.2023.

But the co surrendered the unit by filling the present therefore ttre complainants cannot be fo project.

Ther-e has been an inordinate delay i be condoned.

Thus in such a situation, the Page 14 of 16 Complaint No. ies or stipulations L0l2 of Z02i::l re has consciously demand as an allottees, if the apartr,nent, plot or er the ,terms of the 'nts or stay orders fn eithe," way not r, the ,oromoter is unt on demand with State (iovernment provide,C under the does ,not wish to entitled ,for interest r posses:sion at the tions, responsibilities, anrl of 2016 or the rules anrl ttees as per the agreemer I e promoter has failed t:r he unit in accordance witl: Iy conrpleted by, the datt: is Iiable to the allottees, a:; out prr:judice to any other. amount received by with interest at such rate that after completing the ate from the competent plainants had already mplaint on L L.O3.ZOZZ, d to continue with the the project which cannot complzrinants cannot be usEu GUl?UGIIAM compelled to take possession of the unit right to seek a refund of the paid_up amo 29.

Keeping in view the fact that the all withdrarat from the project and are dema received by the promoter in respect of t failure of the promoter to complete or ina unit in accordanc:e with the terms of compretecr by the date specified therein. section 1B(1) of theActof 201,6.

30' Accordingry, the nrf,n-compriance of the 11,(4)(a) read with secion 1Bt1) of rhe Acr is established.

As surch, the complajnants ar entire amount paid by them at the prescri 8.750/o p.a.

750/o p.a. fthe State Bank of India,s higher rate IMCLR) applicable as of date +lo/s) 2s the Haryan,a Real Erstate (Regulation and from the date of each payment till the act amount within the timelines provided in rul 201.7 ibid.

H.

Directions orf the Authority: 31.

Hence, the authority hereby passes this orde directions under Section 37 of the Act to obligations cast upon the promoters as per tt the Authority under Section 34(Dof the Act of i.

The resprtndent/promoters are directed t Rs.31,35,567 /- received by them from t along with interest at the rate of 1,O.7So/o Complaint No. nd thelrz are well within thr:ir nt. tees/complainants wish fo ding a return of the amount e unit with interest on th e lity to give possession of the reement for sale or duty e matter is covered unde r ndate contained in section the part of the respondent entiderd to a refund of the: rat,e of interest i.e., @ marginal cost of lending ribed under rule 15 of evelopment) Rules, 201,2 al date of refund of the 16 of the Haryana Rules and iss;ues the following sure compliance with functions entrusted to 016. refund the amount i.e., e complainant/allottee .4. as prescribed under l 1,01,2 of 2021 Page 15 oft6 l{AEEM GUl?UGI?AM 32.

Complaint stands disposed of.

33.

File be consigned to the regisrry.

Haryana Complaint N".

10irm:; rule L5 of the Haryana Real Estate Rules, ZO|T from the date of each refund of the amount. ii.

A period of 90 days is given to the res directions given in this order fai would follow.

Iation and Developmer ng) yment till the actual dater of ndents to comply with th e which legal consequencer; Page 16 of16 A^uthority, Gurugram 23