MR DEEPAK DAGAR vs ANSAL HOUSING LIMITED

RUGllAIU Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors.

EFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE GULATORY AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM ateofdecision: 26.07.2023 (Formerly known as ANsAL NSTRUCTION LTD.) HEIC}'TS 86 APPEARANCE l Smt.

Priyanka Agarwal I JIIrt. rIIyd,rKd ^tsd'war, Shn.

Amandeep KadYan Smt.

Priyanka Agarwal Shri.

Amandeep Kadyan I Smt.

Priyanka Agarwal Shri, Amandeep Kadyan Srl Pt,V"*. ngr;"f I co ShI AMi Ashok Sangwan ORDER This order shall dispose of all the 6 comp this authority in form CRA under section and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafte rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Reg Shri.

Amandeep KadYan Member aints titled as above filed before 1 of the Real Estate (Regulation referred as "the Act") read with lation and Development) Rule s, for violation of section 11(4)[a) 7. )- Page 1 of20 ANSAL HOUSING LT HOUSING & C AME OF THE BUILDER ROJECT NAME V/s Ansal Bhim Sain & Dinesh Kuma Ilousing Ltd. & Samyak l,td. cRl962/2022 Sneh Lata V/s Ansal H Samyak Proiects cRl963/2022 sing Ltd.

Rajesh Ralhan V/s Ansal H & Samyak Projects cR1964/2022 Raj Bahadur V/s Ansal Ho Samyak Projects ing Ltd. & cR/969 /2022 Deepak Dagar V/s Ansal H & Samyak Projects P cR/9?3/2022 using Ltd.

Vikram Sekhri V/s Ansal & Samyak Projects cRl4832/2022 2017 (hereinafter referred as "the rules Case No.

Case title 2.

3.

ERA RUGRAII the Act wherein it is inter alia prescri ed that the promoter shall be sibilities and functions to the onsible for all its obligations, respo Ilottees as per the agreement for sale exe ed inter se between parties. e core issues emanating from them re similar in nature and the omplainant(sl in the above referred ma ers are allottees of the project, colony) being developed by the ely, "Ansal Heights 86" (group housin me respondent/promoter i.e., M/s sal Housing & Construction imited. on imited.

The terms and conditions of the buyer's agreements, fulcrum ol' ins to failure on the part of the he issue involved in all these cases pert romoter to deliver timely possession o the units in question, seeking ward of delay possession charges along ith intertest. he details of the complaints, reply to s s, unit no., date of agreement, total sale consideration, total ossession clause, due date of possessio aid amount, and relief sought are given i the table below: c r,rn "eNsll, nrrcHrs ee " 6, Gurugram. any time, within a period of 42 t or within 42 months from ions ond approvsl necessory for subject to timely payment ofoll mstances as described in clouse 32. ollowed to the developer over offering the possession ofthe unit " Emphasis supplied) l construction j.e., 01.10.201 3 being Complaint No.

ANSAL HOUSI Project Name and Location Possession Clause: - 31 "The developer shall oJfer possession of the u months from the date of execution of the the date oI obtqining all the required sa commencement of construction, whichever is dues by buyer and subject to force majeure ci Further, there shall be a grqce period of 6 m and obove the period oI42 months as above i Occupation certificate: - Not obtained Due datel 01.10.2017 (Note:42 months from date ofstart later + 6 months grace period allowed being un k Page 2 of 20 ua litied) 4. \BEBA RUGRAI/ F--,-"ff;4 Note: Grace period is allowed being unqualil due date ofpossession, ed & included while comPuting Complaint No., Case Title Unit no.

Date of apartment buyer agreement Offer of possession for fit outs Sale Consideratio n (sc)/ Total Amount paid by the complainant( sl(APl cR/962/2022 F-0704, floor, Tower [page 23 complaintl 7th F of 24.09.2072 lpage 20 complaintl rf Not offered SC.

I 63,53,200l- AP. t 59,42,767 /- cR/963/2022 H-1003, 1oth floor, Tower H lpage 24 of complaintl 76.70.2072 [page 21of complaintl Not offered SC.

52,29,044 /- AP.

52,75,77 4 /- sG" 55,00,384/- AP. ,384/- AP.

67,32,7311- { { i i cRl964/2022 FH-0502, 5th floor, Tower F [page 24 of complaintl 05.10.2 012 [page 21 o complaintl Not offered cR/96912022 F-0404, 4th floor, Tower F lpage 24 of complaintl 77 .10.201i [page 21 o complaint Not offered sc- 63,27,433/- AP- 63,29,2821- SG 7 4,44,548 /- AP- 56,12,089 /- SG 63,88,507 /- AP- 63,37,777 /- cR/973/2022 )-0706, 7\\ floor, Tower J [page 25 of complaintl 20.03.20ti lpage 22 o comDlaint Not offered cR/ 4832 / 2022 E-0902, 9th floor, Tower E lpage 25 of complaintl 01.06.201: Lpage 22 o complaint Not offered The aforesaid complaints were filed promoter on account of violation of the complainants against tl apartment buyer's agreeme Page 3 of rl l{l he :nt f2{ T 5.

6.

A, 7.

ARERA URUGRAM Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors, ecuted between the parties in respect e possession by the due date, seeking a f said unit for not handing over ard of delay possession charges ong with interest. t has been decided to treat the said com nts as an application for non- ompliance of statutory obligations the part of the promoter/ the Act which mandates the tions cast upon the promoters, espondent in terms of section 34(0 o uthority to ensure compliance ofthe obli e allottee(s) and the real estate agents nder the Act, the rules and the ulations made thereunder. he facts of all the complaints filed by e complainant(sJ /allottee(s)arr: lso similar.

Out of the above-mentioned ase, the particulars of lead casr: 62/2022 Bhim Sain & Dinesh K, r V/s Ansal Housing Ltd, & myak Projects Pvt, Ltd, are being taken into consideration for qua delay possession charges ermining the rights of the allottee[s along with interest and compensation.

Proiect and unit related details The particulars ofthe project, the details fsale consideration, the amount paid by the complainant(sJ, date ofpropo delay period, if any, have been detailed in handing over the possession, the following tabular form: CF.l962/2022 Bhim Sain & Dinesh K mar V/s Ansal Housing Ltd. using Ltd.

8: Pvt.

Ltd.

Samyak Pro ights,B6 Particulars Name of the project Ansal H Project location 6, Gurugram, Haryana A/ Page 4 of 20 Details ARERA URUGRAI,/ complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors_ using colony 11 dated 29.05.2011 valid upto 17 state Pvt.

Ltd. th Floor, Tower F ofcomplaintl ft. super area 12 of complaint] mplainant no.

1& 2.

Endorsement red loper shall offer possession of the time, within q period of 42' the date of execution of the orwithin 42 months from th.l obtaining all the required and approval necessory for t of construction,, is later subject to timel), of all dues by buyer and subject tcr ieure circumstonces os described ir.t 2,.

Further, there shall be o grace oI 6 months allowed to tht' er over qnd above the period of -l Project area Nature of the project DTCP license no. and validity status 28.05.2 Name of Iicensee Resolve RERA registration details F-0704, Unit no.

Unit area admeasuring Date of execution of builder buyer agreement with complainant 1 Note: Further transferred in name ofboth date not known. unit 0 months dste sancti comm which paymen force m clause period Possession clause Pagc 5 of20& 12.843 abres B.

8.

ARERA URUGRAM ["*r",*r";;--] l'^l 42 mot possessit (Emphas [page 2€ ths as above in oflering the n ofthe unit." is supplied) ofcomplaintl 1,2.

Date of commencement of construction as per customer ledger dated 09.04.2022 at pg.

43 of complaint 01.10.2 ( 13 13.

Due date ofpossession 01.10.2r [Note: t comme 01.10.2 allowe( 17 ue date calculated from date of rcement of construction i.e., )13 being later.

Grace period belng unqualiliedl 14.

Sale consideration as per BBA at p9.43 ofcomplaint 163,53, 001- 15.

Amount paid by the complainant as per customer ledger dated 09.04.2022 at pg.

39 of complaint < 59,42, 67 /- 76.

Occupation certificate Not yet btained 17.

Offer ofpossession Not off€ Facts ofthe complaint The complainants have made the followir a. ollowir a.

That the complainants were subiect well as subject of harassment, fl escalation cost, many hidden charget I submissions in the complaint: ' d to unethical trade practice as t buyer agreement clause of which will forcedly imposed on Page 6 ol2 RERA GRA[/ buyer at the time of possession as ta guise of a biased, arbitrary and one buyer agreement between respond in developer's representations, DTC Resolve Estate Pvt.

Limited (Confi transferred his rights to Optus (Confirming Party-2) this company Samyak Projects Pvt.

Ltd (Confirmi party -3 makes another arrangemen all arrangements create doubt, Construction Ltd.

Have legal right against the F-0704, 07th Floor, Tower and have legal & vaiid license to d That the based-on promises an respondent, complainant booked a 3 Ft., along with one covered car par Floor, Tower-F in residential proj Gurugram, Haryana.

The initial (lncluding TaxJ (Rupees Four Lakhs no.

186920 dated 05.09.2011.

That the respondent to dupe the co even executed flat buyer agreem Housing Ltd. & M/s Samyak Proje d,ated 24.09.201,2 and finally respo in Favor of complainants (Mr Bhim S transfer letter.

By this endorsem Page 7 of 20 k Complaint No.

962 of2022 and ors, cs and practice used by builder ided.

That the executed builder t and complainants mentioned given the licence 48 of 2011 to ing Party -1) this company was Corona Developers Pvt.

Ltd. was transferred his rights to Party-3).

At last confirming to joint with respondents thosr: picion, M/S Ansal Housing & collect money from allotees F, "Ansal Heights,86", Gurugram op this project. commitment made by the BHK flat admeasuring 1690 Sq, ng in the unit no.

F-0704, 07th "Ansal Heights 86", Sector 8(', king amount of { 4,00,000/- only) was paid through cheque plainant in their nefarious net t signed between M/s Ansal Pvt Ltd and Mr Dinesh Kumar t endorsed the said agreemen t in & Mr Dinesh Kumar) through nt complainants became legal C.

9. egal C.

9.

ERA URUGRANI allottee and purchaser ofthe said pro beliefthat the project shall be compl the garb of this agreement persisten they were able to extract huge complainants.

That it is pertinent mentioned here th complainants paid a sum of \ 59,42, and before this builder was dema without doing appropriate work on and arbitrary.

That as the delivery of the apartmen was prior to t}le coming into of 01,.07.2077, it is submitted that the c additional financial burden of GST respondent.

Therefore, the responde of the complainant but iust reve complainant and enjoy the input of investigation.

Reliefsought by the complainant: e complainants have sought following Direct the respondent to pay delay p the physical possession of the unit. b. c. d.

Pass order for forensic audit of the Direct the respondent to quash one s Pass an order for payment ofGST am and take the benefit of input credit b Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors. erty.

Respondents create a false ed in time bound manner and in raised demands due to whictt amount of money from the t according to the statement the 67 /- to the respondent till date ded more than 90Yo amount he said project, which is illegal was due on March 2016 which rce of the GST Act, 201-6 i.e, mplainant is not liable to incu r ue to the delay caused by thr: t should pay the GST on behalf builder collect the GST fronr it as a bonus, this is also matter ief(s) ssession charges and handover iect. ded clause from BBA. unt levied upon the complainant builder. )- Page I of20 ERA GRAM 10. the date of hearing, the authority romoter ahout the contraventions as all lation to section 11(a) (a) ofthe act to p ly by the respondent. e respondent has contested the compla That the complainants had approach book a flat bearing no.

F-0704 for an Sector 86, Gurugram.

Upon the regarding inspection ofthe site, title, to sell dated 24.09. ted 24.09.2012 was signed That even if the complaint is admi agreement which was signed in the duress cannot be called into questio builder buyer agreement provides fo in giving possession.

It is submi agreement provides for I 5/- sq. ft. any delay in offering possession of ofthe agreement.

Therefore, the com the said clause and is barred f Commission in order to alter the complaint more than 6 years after it c.

That the respondent had in due cour approvals from the concerned auth permit for grant of permissions fo incidental to development activitie Similarly, the approval for obtain Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors. explained to the respondent// to have been committed in ead guilty or not to plead guilty. nt on the following grounds. d the answering respondent tcl pcoming project Ansal Heights, isfaction of the complainant ocation plans, etc. an agreemenl: een the parties. being true and correct, the r 2012 without coercion or any today.

It is submitted that the a penalty in the event of a delay that clause 37 of the said er month in the super area for unit as mentioned in clause 3:[ lainant will be entitled to invoke om approaching the Hon'bI: enalty clause by virtue of this as agreed upon by both parties. of time obtained all necessar,r' rities. lt is submitted that the disposal of mineral extracted was obtained on 14.04.2014. ng a firefighting scheme was Page 9 oF 20 D.

11.

ERA URUGRAII obtained by the respondents on 24. have in a timely and prompt man compliances be obtained and canno possession to the complainant.

That the answering respondent has and the same has been acknowl submitted that the delay has been ca the control of the answering respon the builder buyer agreement provid cause for the delay is completely respondent ought to have complied High Court of Puniab and Haryana at 2008, dated 16.07.20L2, 31.07 .20L banned the extraction of water, construction process. n process.

Similarly, the correspondence from the answeri majeure, demonetization and the prohibiting construction in and arou L9 pandemic as the causes which project at crucialjunctures for consi That the answering respondent and entered into a builder buyer agreem of delayed possession.

It is submi buyer agreement is clear that there by the complainant/prospective possession.

Page 10 ol:Z Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors, 1.2015.

Thus, the respondents er ensured that the requisite be faulted on giving delayed dequately explained the delay by the complainant.

It is ed on account ofthings beyond ent.

It is further submitted thal. for such eventualities and thr: vered in the said clause. 'l-he with the orders of the Hon'ble: ndigarh in CWP No.

20032 of , 2L.08.2012.

The said order:; ich is the backbone of tht: mplaint itself reveals that the respondent specifies force orders of the Hon'ble NGl' Delhi in addition to the covid ntributed to the stalling of the ble spells. e complainant admittedly have nt which provides for the event d that clause 32 of the builder no compensation to be sought er in the event of delay in ), 0 72, E.

13. t4.

15.

RERA RUGRAM opies of all the relevant documents h ord.

Their authenticity is not in dispu ecided on the basis ofthese undisputed d y the parties. urisdiction of the authority e application of the respondent rega und of jurisdiction stands rejected. rritorial as well as subject matter iuris omplaint for the reasons given below.

Territorial jurisdiction s per notification no.7 /92/20L7-LTCP d Country Planning Department, tory Authority, Gurugram shall be urpose with offices situated in Gurugra n question is situated within the pl erefore, this authority has complete e present complaint.

II Subiect matter iurisdiction tion 11(4J(a) of the Act, 2016 provi onsible to the allottee as per reproduced as hereunder: Section 71 (4) The promoter sholl- (a) be responsible for all obligations, under the provisions of this Act or thereunder or eunder or to the allottees qs per th ossociotion ofallottees, as the case moy aportments, plots or buildings, os the Page 11 of 20 Complaint No.

962 of2022 and ors. been filed and placed on the .

Hence, the complaint can be cuments and submission made ing reiection of complaint on authority observes that it has iction to adjudicate the presenl. d 1.4.72.2017 issued by Town iurisdiction of Real Estate: ntire Gurugram District for all In the present case, the proiecli area of Gurugram District. torial jurisdiction to deal with es that the promoter shall btr t for sale.

Section 11(4)(a) i:; responsibilities ond functions rules and regulotions mode ogreement for sole, or to the tillthe conveyance of0ll the mqy be, to the ollottees, or the ERA URUGRA[/ common areas to the ossociation ofql as the case mqy be; Section 3$-Functions of the Authority: 34A of the Act provides to ensure com upon the promoters, the allottees and Act and the rules and regulotions made t6. , in view of the provisions of the Act omplete jurisdiction to decide the comp bligations by the promoter leaving asi ecided by the adjudicating officer ifpurs tage. indings on the relief sought by the co .l Direct the respondent to pay delay rate of interest fi:om the due date of handing over of possession. n the present complaint, the complaina roject and is seeking delay possession id.

Proviso to section 1.8 provides that withdraw from the project, he shall b r every month of delay, till the hand may be prescribed and it has been pres "Section 18! - Return of amount and 18(1). lfthe promoter fails to complete an qpartment, plot, or building. - (o) in occordqnce with the terms of cose moy be, duly completed by the dote (b) due to discontinuance ofhis busi suspension or revocotion of the regi. other reoson, he shall be liable on demond to the wishes to withdraw from the project, remedy available, to return the qm thdt aportment, plot, building, os the PaEe 72 of 20 Complaint No.

2 and ors. sor the competent outhority, liance of the obligations cost real estqte agents under this ereunder. uoted above, the authority hasi nt regarding non-compliance of compensation which is to be by the complainants at a later plainants. ession charges at prescribed actual date of ossession till the s intend to continue with the harges interest on the amount ere an allottee does not intend paid, by the promoter, interest over of possession, at such rate ibed under rule 15 ofthe rules: ensation is unoble to give possession of agreement for sole or, as the pecified therein:or os a developer on occount of tion under this Act or for any qllonees, in cose the ollottee ithout prejudice to ony other received by him in respect ol may be, with interest qt k 77.

ERA UGRA[I such rate as may be prescribed in this in the monner os provided under this Act: Provided that where an qllottee does n project, he shall be paid, by the promo deloy, till the honding over of the prescribed." 18. lause 31 of the apartment buyer rovides for handing over of possession a "37.

The developer shalloffer possession ofth of 42 months from the dqte of obtaining approval necessary for com is lqter subjectto timely pqyment ofall d majeure circumstances as described in o grace period of6 months qllowed to the period oI42 months as above in 19. t the outset, it is relevant to comment o e agreement wherein the possession h and conditions of this agr complainants agreements not being in default and compliance with a documentation as prescribed by the pro and incorporation of such conditions are so heavily loaded in favor ofthe promoter a single default by the allottee in fulfillin etc. as prescribed by the promoter m irrelevant for the purpose of allottees handing over possession loses its mea clause in the buyer's agreement by th complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ots.

2 and ots. qlf including compensation intend to withdrqw from the ', interest for every month of ssion, ot such rote os may be (Emphosis supplied) ment (in short, agreement ) d is reproduced below: unitony time, within o period t of the agreement or within I the required sonctions and of c onstructio n, w h i c h e v e r by buyer ond subject to force 32.

Furthet, there shqll be e developer over and obove ng the possession ofthe unit." the preset possession clause of been subjected to all kinds of nt and application, and th,: der any provisions of these provisions, formalities and oter.

The drafting of this clause t only vague and uncertain but d against the allottee that even formalities and documentations y make the possession clause and the commitment date for ing.

The incorporation of such promoter is just to evade the ,L- Page 13 of 20 20.

2t.

ERA URUGRANI bility towards timely delivery of subj f his right accruing after delay in possessi ow the builder has misused his domi ischievous clause in the agreement and ut to sign on the dotted lines. ue date of handing over possessio eriod: The respondent/promoter has onstruction of the project was badly ated.

16.07.201.2, 31..07 .2072 and 21.08 aryana High Court duly passed in civil rough which the shucking /extraction ackbone of construction process, simulta sed by the Hon'ble National Green cavation work causing Air Quality Ind he public at Iarge without admitting any n this particular case, the Authority co ised by the respondent and observes th and over the possession of the apartm m the date ofexecution ofthe agreeme te of obtaining all the required sancti mmencement of construction, whic culated due date of possession from nstruction i.e., 01.10.2013 being later. n 01.04.2017.

Since in the present nqualified reason for grace period/ Page 14 ol20 Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors. unit and to deprive the allottee n. llottee n.

This is just to comment as to nt position and drafted such e allottee is left with no option and admissibility of grace ised the contention that the cted on account of the orders 201,2 of the Hon'ble Punjab &. t petition no.20032 of 2008 water was banned which is ther eously orders at different dates ibunal restraining thereby th€r being worse, may be harmful tcr ability. sidered the above contentions t the promoter has proposed to within a period of 42 months t or within 42 months from the ns and approval necessary for ever is later.

The authority the date of commencement of he period of 42 months expired matter the BBA incorporates nded period in the possession 22.

23.

24.

ERA RUGRA[,,1 Iause, Accordingly, the authority allows e promoter at this stage. rther in the judgement ofthe Hon'ble Su f Newtech Promoters and Developers Pri 2021-2022(l) RCR (cJ, 357 reitera vate Limited & other Vs Union of India 020 decided on 1,2.05.2022. it was obse 25.

The unquolifred right of the allottee Section 18(1)(a) qnd Section 19(4) of the contingencies or stipulations thereof, It qp consciously provided this right of refund absolute right to the allottee, if the prom qpartment, plot or building within the time agreement regardless of unforeseen Court/Tribunol, which is in either way not q buyer, the promoter is under an obligation with interest ot the rote prescribed by th compensotion in the monner provided un the allottee does not wish to withdrow from for interest Ior the period of delay till hond prescribed. he promoter is responsible for all o ctions under the provisions of the gulations made thereunder or to the al nder section 11(a) [a). dmissibility of delay possession interest: The complainants are seeki delay in handing over the possession at However, the allottees intend to continue delay possession charges in respect of Page 15 of 20 Complaint No.

962 of2022 and ors. grace period of 6 months to reme Court of India in the cases ate Limited vs state of u.P. te of u.P. and in case of M/s Sana Realtors others SLP (CivilJ No.

1300 5 of to seek refund referred Under Act is not dependent on ony rs that the legislature hqs demond os an unconditionol fails to give possession of the 'pulated under the terms ofthe or stoy orders of the butoble to the ollottee/hone refund the amount on demand State Covernment including the Actwith the proviso thot if e project, he sholl be entitled ng over possession at the rqte ligations, responsibilities, and ct of 2016, or the rules and ottee as per agreement for sale along with prescribed rate delay possession charges for the the prescribed rate of interest. with the project and are seeking e subject unit with interest at l.

25.

26.

27.

ERA RUGRAIV rescribed rate as provided under rule eproduced as under: Rule 15, Prescribed rqte of interest' 18 qnd sub-section (4) and subsection (1) For the purpose of proviso to sec sections (4) ond (7) of section prescribed" shall bethe State Bqnk lending rote +zo/b.: Provided that in case the Sta lending rate (MCLR) is not in u benchmark lending rateswhich the time to time for lending to the gen e legislature in its wisdom in the su rovision of rule 15 of the rules, has de interest.

The rate ofinterestso determin nd if the said rule is followed to award practice in all the cases.

Consequently, as per website of https://sbi.co.in, the marginal cost of len date i.e.,26.07,2023 is 8.750l0.

Accordi will be marginal cost of lending rate i2%0 F.ll.

Direct the respondentto handover The respondent is legally bound to an occupation certificate from the comp duty bound to obtain OC and hand over Since the respondent has offered the p complainant without obtaining OC accordingly the said letter is invalid.

And the possession ofthe unit and hand over obtaining OC.

Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and' ors. of the rules. the rules.

Rule 15 has been viso to section 72, section ') of section 191 ion 12; section 18; qnd sub' 9, the "interest at the rate lndio highest morginol cost of Bonk of lndio morginql cost of it shall be replaced bY such te Bonk oflndio may fix from I public. ordinate legislation under the rmined the prescribed rate of by the legislature, is reasonable e interest, it will ensure uniforn't e State Bank of India ing rate (in short, MCLR) as o n , the prescribed rate of interesit .e.,10.75o/o. physical possession ofthe unill. the pre-requisites for obtaining tent authority.

The Promoter is ssession only after obtaining OC. session for fit outs letter to the m the competent authority e respondent is directed to offer he physical possession only aftt'r 4r Page 16 of 20 i:l 28, 29.

30.

31.

ERA RUGRAM .III.

Directthe respondent to quash one s e complainants have not mentioned on mplaint except from clause 37 ofthe sai 5/- sq. ft. per month in the super area for f the unit as mentioned in clause 31 of egarding this is already provided in the .lV.

Request the authority to pass the o he complainant has neither pressed th oes the counsel argued during the cou ssue.

Therefore, the authority cannot deli .v.

Pass an order for payment ofGST amo nd taken benefit ofinput creditby build e authority has decided this issue in t 019 titled as Varun Cupta V/s Emaar MG s held that for the proiects where the d 1,07 .2017 (date of coming into force of ot entitled to charge any amo omplainant/allottee as the liability of th o the due date of possession as per the ln the present complaint, the possession to be delivered by 01.10.2017 and th operation thereafter on 0L.07.2017.

So charge GST from the complainants/all become due up to the due date of possess The following reliefs in addition to the a the complainants in CR/963 /2022 compl int: Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors. ded clause from BBA. from BBA. sided clause particularly in its agreement which provides for y delay in offering possession e agreement.

The explanation lief no.

1. for forensic audit, said relief in its pleadings nor e of hearing regarding the said te on this reliel t levied upon the complainanl: e complaint bearing no, 4031 r:f Land Ltd. wherein the authoritY date of possession was Prior lo , the respondent/promoter is nt towards GST from the charge had not become due uP yer's agreements. f the subject unit was required incidence of GST came into the respondent is entitled to ees as the liability of CST had on as per the said agreement. ove reliefs are being sought by )rr Page 17 of 20 34.

ERA RUGRA[/ Direct the respondent to quash esca rnal electrilication charges. e respondent shall not charge anything ot the part of the agreement.

Howeve arged by the promoters at any point o ment as per law settled by Hon'ble S 864-3889 /2020. n consideration of the documents de by both the parties regarding contra authority is satisfied that the respon ection 11(4)(a) ofthe Act by not handing per the agreement.

By virtue of claus etween the parties on 24.09.2072, t partmentwas to be delivered within 42 the required sanctions and approval nstruction, whichever is later.

The a ossession from the date of comme 1.10.2013 being later.

The period of42 aras grace period is concerned, the same i bove.

Therefore, the due date of handin he respondent has not issued a letter for t is the failure of the respondent/prom esponsibilities as per the agreement to e stipulated period. ordingly, the non-compliance of 35.

1(4)(a) read with proviso to section Complaint No.

962 of2022 and ors, tion cost, firelighting charge & om the complainants which is holding charges shall not be time even after being part of preme Court in civil appeal no. appeal no.

Ie on record and submissions ention of provisions of the Act, ent is in contravention of the possession by the due date 31 of the agreement executed e possession of the subject nths from the date ofobtaining cessary for commencement ol' ority calculated due date ol' cement of construction i.e., nths expired on 01.04.2017.

As allowed for the reasons quoted over possession is 01..10.2017. ossession till date.

Accordingly, ter to fulfil its obligations ancL and over the possession withirL the mandate contained 1) of the Act on the in section part of the 4/ Page 18 of20 G.

36.

ERA U1?UGRAN/] espondent is established.

As such the romoter, interest for every month of de e., 01.10.2017 till the offer ofthe possess ver of possession after receipt of OC wh ate i.e., 10.75 0/o p.a. as per proviso to s le 15 ofthe rules. ections of the authority ence, the authority hereby irections under section 37 of the Act to e st upon the promoter as Per the fun nder section 34[f]: The respondent is directed to hand ov of the unit to the complainants within order and pay interest at the prescri month of delay from due date ofpos of the possession plus two months or receipt of OC whichever is earlier.

The arrears of such interest accrued order by the authority shall be paid within a period of 90 days from date o month ofdelay shallbe paid by the pro ofthe subsequent month as per rule 1 c.

The complainants are directed to adjustment of interest for the delayed ge 19 of20 Complaint No.

962 of 2022 and ors, lottee shall be paid, by the y from due date of possession on plus Evo months or handing chever is earlier, at prescribed ion 18(11 of the Act read with rder and issues the following sure compliance of obligations on entrusted to the authoritY' the actual physical possession 2 months from the date of this; rate of 10.757o p.a. for every ion i.e.,01.10.2017 tillthe offer anding over of possession after m 01.L0. r m 01.L0.2017 till the date of the promoter to the allottee this order and interest for everl/ oter to the allottee before 1Oth 2) of the rules. outstanding dues, eriod. if any, after L Pa --:- ERA UGRAN/ The respondent shall not is not the part of the charged by the promoters agreement as per I no.3864-3889 decision shall order. e complaints laced on the case file : 26.07 .2023 Complaint No.

The rate of interest chargeable from allottee by the promoter, in case ofdefault shall be charged at the p bed rate i.e., 10.750lo by the respondent/promoter which is the e rate of interest which the promoters shall be liable to pay the all delayed possession charges as per secti , in case of default i.e., the n 2(za) of the Act. ythi from the complainants which \ ', holding charges shall not be time even after being part of me Court in civil appeal rue rd copies of this order be be consigned to registry.

AiV (Ashok ) Mem Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram Page 20 of20