GAUTAM RANA vs DLF LIMITED

HARER/& ffi GUI?UGI?AM BEFORE THE HARYANA REAL ESTATE REGTJLA AUTHORITY, GURUGRAM ORY Shri Arun Kumar RDER Chairman I 1.

This order shall dispose of two complaints titled as above ed before this authority under Section of the Real Estate ( lation and Development) Act, 201,6 (in strort, the Act) read with le 28 of the Complaint 2024 &29 No.

6547 Date of Decision: NAME OF THE BUILDER DLF PVT.

LTD.

PROIECT NAME "The Grove" cR/6547 /2024 Ravi Kumar shaan Dang cR/Ze/202s Gautam Ra V/S DLF Ltd.

Ravi Kumar shaan Dang 017 (in short, in it is inter alia prescribed that the promoter shall be responsible for I obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provision of the or the rules and regulations made there under or to the allottee as per for sale executed inter se.

2.

The core issues emanating from them are complainant[s) in the above referred matters Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, the RulesJ for violation of section 11(4j(a) of the Act wh agreement similar in ure and the the project, are allottees Page 1 of 15 S.

No.

Case No.

Case title APPEAR,{NCE 1.

Gautam Rana v/s DLF Ltd.

2. ffiHARERA ffi eunUGRAM Complaint No.

654T of 2024 & 29 of 2025 namely, "The Grove" being developed by the same respondent/promoter i'e., M/s DLF Pvt.

The terms and conditions of the buyer,s agreements, fulcrum of the issues involved in all these cases pertains to cancellation of the unit and other issues.

3.

The details of the complaints, reply, unit tro., date of agreement, possession clause, due date of possession, total sale consideration, total paid amount and relief sought are given in the table below: Proiect Name and Location "The Grove" in DLF 5 situated in Sector- 54, Gurugram.

5.3073 Acres Proiect Area RERA Registered Vide reg Registered istration no.

13 of 2022 dated valid upto 31.12.2025 _ ndent floor for residentia nds that timely delivery of :tl use along with parking tt n of allottees or the compe Lule2(1)(f) of Rules 2017, is 21..02. is 21..02.2022 Possession Clause 7.

Possession of t The Promoter agre said independent flt the common areas the case may be, as , Agreement. ;- he said indeper es and understa tor for residentit to the associatio provided under I. l usage possessron of the t the Allottee and tent authorit"y, as the essence of the Complaint no. / Title/ Dare of Filing / Reply Sr.

Unit no. and area Date of builder buyer agreement Status of Possession Total sale consideration and amount oaid _- -,] TSC: - Rs.

5,03,54,970l- AP: - Rs.58,15,502/- L. cR/6547 /2024 Gautam Rana v/s DLF Ltd.

DOF 23.01.2025 Reply 02.05.2025 B-t4/20A, 1.t floor 1.382.770 sq. ft. carpet area 374.878 sq. ft. balcony area 128.867 sq. fr. basement area 134.550 sq. ft. parking area Application: 08.r0.2022 BBA: r0.04.2023 Reminder Letters: 13.04.2023, 03.05.202 3, t6.0s.2023, 03.06.2023, 07.08.2023 Cancellation Letter: 20.09.2023 Due date of possession: 31..r2.2025 Page 2 oflS ffiH ffic ARTR& URUGI?AM Complaint No, 6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 The aforesaid complaints were filed against the promoter on account of violation of the apartment buyer's agreement and allotment letter against the allotment of units in the project of the respondent/promoter and seeking refund of the paid amount.

It has been decided to treat the said complaints as an application for non- compliance of statutory obligations on the part of the promoter/ respondent in terms of section 3a(fJ of the Act which mandates the authority to ensure compliance of the obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottee(s) and the real estate agents under the Act, the rules and the regulations made thereunder.

6.

The facts of all the complaints filed by the complainantfs)/allortee[s) are also similar.

Out of the above-mentioned case, the particulars of lead case 4.

5.

2. cR/2e/202s Gautam Rana V/S DLF Ltd.

DOF 23.01.2025 Reply 02.05.2025 B-].4/1,6A, I rt floor 1382.770 sq. ft. carpet area 374.878 sq. ft. balcony area 128.867 sq. ft. basement area 134.550 sq.

34.550 sq. ft. parking area Application: 08,70.2022 BBA: 10.04.2023 Reminder Letters: t3.04.2023, 03.05.2 023, t6.05.2023, 03.06,2023, 07.08.2023 Cancellation Letter: 20,09.2023 Due date of possession: 31.12.2025 TSC: - Rs.

5,03,54,970l- AP: - Rs.58,15,502/- Note: In the table referred are elaborated as follows: above, certain abbreviations have been used.

They Abbreviation Full form DOF BBA TSC AP Date of filing complaint Builder buyer agreement Total Sale consideration Amount paid bv the allott S Page 3 of 15 HARERP, W* GUI?UGI?AM CR/6547/2024 titled as Gautqm Rana V/S DLF Ltd. are being taken inro consideration for determining the rights of the allottee(s) qua refund of the allotted unit.

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

6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 A.

7.

Particulars Name and location of the "The Grove", DLF 5, Sector-54, Gurugram, Haryana Nature of the proiect Residential Floors Proiect area 5.3073 acres RERA Registered/ not Rergistered vide no.

13 of ZOZ2 issued on 21,.02.2022 up to 3t.lZ.20Zs Application dated 08J.0.2022 e no.

28 of repl Allotment Letter 21.L0.2022 no.43 ofrepl Unit No./lndependent Floor Plot no.

B-t4/20, Unit no.

B-I4/20A on 1't floor e no.

23 of complaint Unit admeasuring area t382.770 sq. ft. carpet area 37 4.878 sq. ft. balcony area L2B.B67 sq. ft. basement area 134.550 sq. ft. parking area Page 4 of, 15 s.N.

1.

4.

Details 6.

B. ffiHARER& ffi GURUGRAM Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 e no.

45 of complaint 9.

10.

Date of builder buyer agreement 10.04.2023 fpage no.2L of complaint) Possession Clause 7.

Possession of the said independent floor for residential usage: The Promoter agrees and understands that timely delivery of possession of the saicl independent floor for residential use along with parking to the ng to the Allottee and rhe common areas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, as provided under Rule2il)(0 of Rules 20t7, is the essence of the Agreement.

1,1,.

1,2.

Due date of possession 3L.12.2025 fas per possession clause) Reminder letters t3.04.2023, 03.05.2023, t6.05.2023, 03.0 6.2023, 07 .08.2023 (page no.

13 1,-144 of replvl 13, 74.

15.

16.

17.

Cancellation letter 20.09.2023 fpage no.

145 of replyJ Third parry rights created 13.02.2024 fpage no.

146 of reply) Total sale consideration Rs.

5,03,5 4,970 /- (as per pavment plan at page 11,7 of replyJ Total amount paid by the complainant Rs.58,1-5,502/- fas per cancellation letter at page 145 of replyJ O ccupation certificate 30.08.2024 Page 5 of 1S ffiHARER* ffict;RUcRAM Complaint No.

654T of 2024 &29 of 2025 I.

Facts of the complaint: The complainant has made the following submissions in the complaint: That in October, 2022 complainant booked the unit/independent floor bearing no.

B-14 /zoA, Grove at DLF 5, Sector-54, Gurugram, Haryana.

II' That at that time complainant was asked to pay the initial booking amount of Rs.

10,00,000/- which complainant had paid vide online payment and respondent had acknowledged the same.

III.

That after taking /receiving the aforesaid amount from the complainant, respondent had entered into an agreement to sale, however till date the buyer builder agreement has not been provided by the respondent to the complainant.

IV.

That as per payment schedule, complainant has paid an amount of Rs.

58,1.5,502/- out of the total sale consideration i.e.

Rs.

5,05,5 4,97 0 /- to respondent.

That at the time of booking as well as signing of the Agreement to sale respondent had promised complainant that respondent would hand over the possession of the property / apartm ent / unit to the complainant on or before 3r/rz/2025 from the date of signing and execution of the agreement. agreement.

That the complainant has adopted the construction link payment plan, wherein the respondent has demanded the amount as per construction link plan and on the assurances of the representative of the respondent company.

B.

V.

157 ofre Offer of possession Not offered VI.

Page 6 of 15 ffiHARERA s*GllRuenAHl Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &.29 of 2025 VII.

That complainant had booked the property in responclent aforesaid residential group housing project to own a house for a standard living to their status and taste but complainant was cheated by respondent by giving the assurance that payment may be demanded as per the construction link plan, however the respondent made various reminder for making the payment, without acknowledging the difficulty face by the complainant.

VIII.

That respondent had taken almost lOo/o of the amount as per payment schedule from the complainant on the basis of respondent impressive projections and false promises which complainant had drained out from her hard earned savings.

Thus, respondent have committed the offence of "Cheating" which is a criminal in nature.

IX.

That respondent after indulging in unfair trade practice had intentionally grabbed the hard earned money of complainant and violated the general principals of the real estate business.

Moreover, had given the highly deficient & inadequate services to complainant.

X.

That the complainant bonafidely for his needs and better future purchased the flat/unit in question, further the respondent failed to give the possession of the flat/unit in question on time.

C.

Relief sought by the complainant: 9.

The complainant has sought the following relief(s) Direct the respondent to refund the entire amount along r,vith interest.

On the date of hearing, the authority respondent/promoter about the contraventions as committed in relation to section lr(4) [a) of the Act to plead guilry. ad guilry. explained to the alleged to have been to plead guilty or not Page 7 of 15 ffiHARERA ffi eunUGRAM Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &29 of 20ZS D.

Reply by the respondent: 11" 'Ihe respondent has contested the complaint on the following grounds: That the present complaint is not maintainable in law or on facts.

That the complainant has no locus standi or cause of action to file the present complaint.

That the complainant is estopped by her own acts, conduct, acquiescence, Iaches, omissions etc. from firing the present compraint.

That the complainant had made detailed and elaborate enquiries with regard to all aspects of the residential plotted colony known as ,,.fhe Grove", DLF 5, Sector 54, Gurugram conceptualised ancl promoted by the respondent.

After completely satis$zing himself with regard to the specifications of the apartments, competence and capabiliry of the respondent application for booking/provisional allotment had been submitted by the complainant.

V' That vide allotment letter dated 21.10.2022, independent floor on plot no B-14/20A, on the first floor having carpet area of I3BZ sq. ft. and 128 sq. ft. of carpet area in the basement, was provisionally allotted in favour of the complainant.

VI' That demand letter dated 02.1r.2022 calling upon the complainant ro remit the instalment payable as per the applicable payment plan.

VII' That under cover of letter dated 17.11,.2022, the buyer,s agreement was forwarded to the complainant for execution.

The complainant was called upon to execute the buyer's agreement and return to the respondent within 30 days ancl also to make payment of charges for registration of the buyer,s agreement. vlll' That despite continuous foilow up from the respondent, the complainant delayed execution of the buyer's agreement for reasons I.

II.

Page B of 15 ffiHARERA ffi oUnUGRAM XII.

Complaint No.

654T of 2024 &29 of 2025 known to himself.

Eventually the buyer's agreement was registerecl on 10.04.2023.

0.04.2023.

That at the time of booking the floor in question, the complainant had agreed and undertaken to make timely payment of sale consideration in accordance with the applicable schedule of payment.

However, the complainant, right from the beginning, was extremely irregular in making payment. consequently, the respondent was compelled to issue demand notices and reminders for payment.

That respondent was under no obligation to send repeated reminders to the complainant calling upon the complainant to make payment of outstanding instalments especially since it was the financial and contractual duty of the complainant to make payment of instalments of consideration in respect of said apartment in a timely and irregular manner.

That however, the demand notices and reminders continued to be ignored by the complainant.

Eventually, the respondent issued final notice dated 07.08.2023 calling upon the complainant to clear his outstanding dues amounting to Rs 7S,S3,Z2gl_ within a period of 30 days from the said letter.

The complainant was informed that in case the complainant failed to clear his outstanding dues, the allotment in his favour shall stand cancelled, with forfeiture of booking amount, interest on delayed payments, any interest paid, due or payable and other amounts of a non-refundable nature.

That despite receipt of the said notice as well as other communication addressed to the complainant from time to time by the respondent, the complainant failed to come forward and crear his outstanding X.

XI, Page 9 of 15 HARER,q GUt?UGRAM XIII.

XIV. dues.

Hence, the respondent was left with r allotment in favour of the complainant.

That after cancellation of allotment in favo unit in question has been reallotted to the cr That in so far as the status of constructior the Respondent has duly cornpletecl cons made an application for issuance of the r no option but to cancel the 'our of the complainant, the current allottee. allottee. rn of the unit is concerned, rstruction of the same and l occupation certificate on 1,2.08.2024.

The occupation certificate has been issued by the competent authority on 30.08.2024. xv, That the respondent has duly fulfilled its obligations u Their authenticity is not in dispute.

Hence, the complaint can the basis of those undisputed documents and submissions parties.

E. |urisdiction of the authority: The authority observes that it has territorial as well as s er RERA as well as in terms of the buyer's ag ryer's agreement executed with allottees.

The project has been registered under RERA and regis ation of the project is valid uptill 31,.L2.2025.

There is no default or as the respondent is concerned.

12. copies of all the relevant documents have been filed and p pse in so far on record. decided on made by the 13. ject matter given jurisdiction to adjudicate the present complaint for the below.

E.I Territorial jurisdiction 1.4.

As per notification no. t/gz/zol7-1Tcp dated 1,4.tz.zoL1 i ued by Town and country Planning 'Department, Haryana, the jurisdi NS Real Estate Regulatory Authority,, Gurugram district for all purposes.

In the present case, shall be en of Haryana Gurugram question is Complaint 2024 &29 No.

6547 of the project i 10 of 15 Complaint No.

6547 oi 2024 &29 of 2025 situated within the planning area of Gurugram district.

Therefore, this authority has complete territorial jurisdiction to deal with the present complaint.

E.ll Subiect-matter jurisdiction Section 11(a)[a) of the Act,2016 provides that the promoter shall be responsible to the allottees as per agreement for sale.

Section 11(4)[a) is reproduced as hereunder: Section 77..,,. ft) The promoter shall- (a) be responsible for all obligations, responsibilities and functions under the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulations made thereunder or to the allottees as per the ogreement for sale, or to the association of allottees, as the cose may be, till the conveyance oJ- all the ap all the apartments, plots or buildings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common areas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be; Section 34-Functions of the Authority: 3a(fl of the Act provides to ensure compliance of the obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the re'al estate agents under this Act and the rules and regulations made thereunder.

So, in view of the provisions of the Act quoted above, the authority has complete jurisdiction to decide the complaint regarding non-compliance of obligations by the promoter learring aside compensation which is to be decided by the adjudicating officer if pursued by the complainant at a later stage.

F.

Findings on the relief sought by the complainant(s): i.

Direct the respondent to refund the entire amount along with interest.

In the present complaint, the complainant booked a unit in the project of respondent namely,'The Grove'in DLF 5, situated at sector 54, Gurugram.

The complainant applied for allotment for allotment of unit vide application dated 08.10.2022 and thereafter vide allotment letter dared 21.1.0.2022 the complainant was allotted a unit bearing no.

B-14/ZOA on ffiHARERA ffi- GURUGRAM 15.

Page 11 of 15 r-rtl,r W- "SeJt il\ iit*:) GURUGt?AM Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 plot no' B-14 /20 situated on 1-,t floor.

Further, the builder buyer,s agreement was executed between the complainant and the respondent on L0'04'2023 for the total sale consideration of Rs.

S,o3,s4,g7O/- out of which the complainant has made a payment of Rs.58,15,s02/- against the same in all' As per clause 7 of the agreement, the respondent was required to hand over possession of the unit by 31,.1,2.2025.

The complainant is seeking refund of the amount paid by him.

The respondent has stated that the demand were raised as per payment plan annexed with builder buyer,s agreement dated 10.04. ted 10.04.2023 and the complainant has made payment of Rs' 58,L5,502/- However, various reminder letters were issued on 13.04.2023, 03.05.2023, 1,6.os.zoz3, 03.06. zoz3, 07.08.2023 bur despite repeated follow ups the complainant failed to act further and comply with their contractual obligations and therefore the unit of the complainant was finally terminated vide retter dated z0.og.zoz3.

1B' 0n consideration of documents available on record and submissions made by both the parties, the authority is of the view that Section 1B[1] is applicable only in the eventuality lvhere the promoter fails to complete or unable to give possession of the unit in accordance with terms of agreement for sale or duly completed by the date specified therein.

The due date of possession as per buyer's agreement was 3 1.72.2025.

The sale consideration of the unit was Rs.

5,03,5 4,g70/- and the complainant has made a payment of Rs. sB,l,s,soz/- against the same in ail.

As per the payment plan annexed as Schedule C in the agreement dated 10.04.2023 at page 50 of the complaint, the complainant was required to make payments as per the time linked payment plan.

But the complainant has failed to make a payment and has onry paid Rs. s8,15,502 /- tothe respondent.

The respondent for the payment of outstanding dues issued various reminders HARERS, Page 12 of15 ffiHARERA S.- GURUGRAM Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 dated 1.3.0 4.2023, 0 3.0 5.2 023, 1.6.os.zoz3, 0 3.0 6.2 0 23, 07 .og.z0z3 but rhe complainant failed to honour its obligation to pay the amount on time.

So, in such a situation, the plea of the complainant that he is entitled to full refund of the paid-up amount is untenable.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, only refund can be granted to the complainant after certain deductions as prescribed under law.

The issue with regard to deduction of earnest money on cancellation of a contract arose in cases of Moula Bux vs. union of India, (1970) 1 scR gz? and sirdar K.B. irdar K.B.

Ram chandra Raj ors, vs, sarqh c. urs., (207s) 4 scc 736, and wherein it was held that forfeiture of the amount in case of breach of contract must be reasonable and if forfeiture is in the nature of penalty, then provisions of section 74 of Contract Act, 1872 are attached and the party so forfeiting must prove actual damages.

After cancellation of allotment, the flat remains with the builder as such there is hardly any actual damage.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions in CC/435/201.9 Ramesh Malhotra VS.

Emaar MGF Land Limited (decided on 29,06.2020) and Mr. saurav sanyol vs.

M/s IREU private Limited (decided on 12.04.2022) and followed in CC/2766/2017 in case titled as Jayant singhal and Ann vs.

MsM India Limited decided on 26,07.2022, held that 1,00/o of basic sale price is reasonable amount to be forfeited in the name of "earnest money".

Keeping in view the principles laid down in the first two cases, a regulation known as the Flaryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority Gurugram IForfeiture of earnest money by the builr:ier) Regulations, 11(5) of 2018, was farmed providing as uncler- ,,5, AMOUNT OF EARNEST MONEY Scenario prior to the Real Estate (Regulations and Development) Act,2016 was different.

Frauds were carried out without any fear as there was no law for the some but now, in view of the above facts and taking into consideration the iudgements of tton'ble National Consumer Disputes 19.

20.

Page 13 of15 ffiHARERA ffi eunuorrAM Complaint No.

6547 of 2024 &29 of 2025 Redressal Commission and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the authority is of the view that the forfeiture qmot)nt of the earnest money shall not exceed more than 100/o of the consideration amount of the real estate i.e. apartment/plot/building qs the case moy be in all cases where the concellation of the flat/unit/plot is made by the builder in a unilateral mqnner or the buyer intends to withdraw from the project ond any agreement containing any clause contrary to the af to the aforesaid regulations sho// be void and not binding on the buyer." 21,.

So, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex court and provisions of regulation 11 of 201,8 framed by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gurugram, and the respondent/builder can't retain more than 1.00/o of sale consideration as earnest money on cancellation but that was not done.

So, the respondent/builder is directed to refund the amount received from the complainant after deductin g 1,Oo/o of the sale consideration and return the remaining amount along with interest at the rate of 10.900/o (the State Bank of India highest marginal cost of lending rate (MCLR) applicable as on date +20/o) as prescribed under rule 15 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 , from the date of termination/cancellation 20.09.2023 till the actual date of refund of the amount within the timelines provided in rule 16 of the Haryana Rules 201,7 ibid. [Note: During proceedings dated 01.08.2025 the rate of interesr was inadvertently mentioned as 11,10% instead of 1,o.9oo/o).

G.

Directions of the authority 22.

Hence, the authorily hereby passes this order and issues the following directions under section 37 of the Act to ensure compliance of obligations cast upon the promoter as per the function entrusted to the authority under section 3a[fJ: The respondent/builder is directed to refund the deposited amount in both the cases after deducting !00/o of the sale consideration along with an interest @ 1O.9Oo/o on such balance Page 14 of15 HARER& ffi GURUGRAM amount, from the date of termination/cancellation til date of refund of the amount within the timelines pro 1,6 of the Haryana Rules 2017 ibid. ii.

A period of 90 days is given to the respondent to com directions given in this order and failing which legal would follow.

23.

This decision shall mutatis mutandis apply to cases mentio this order.

24.

Complaints stand disposed of.

25.

Files be consigned to registry. registry.

Haryana Real Estate R latory Authority, Gurugra 01.08.2025 Complaint 2024 &29 No.

6547 of the actual in rule y with the sequences in para 3 of Page 15 of 15