Byju’s Second Rights Issue for Raising Funds Halted by NCLT  ||  Byju’s Second Rights Issue for Raising Funds Halted by NCLT  ||  Gau. HC: Party Can Invoke Arbitration Despite Alternative Remedy Available Under RERA Act  ||  Mad. HC: Sexual Harassment at Workplace a ‘Continuing Offence’ If Causes Constant Trauma and Fear  ||  Delhi High Court: U/S 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Scope of Inquiry is Limited  ||  Meghalaya High Court: Bail Plea Rejected Despite Delay in Trial  ||  Pat. HC: After Commen. of Trial, Amen. of Pleadings Allowed if Required to Arrive at Just Conclusion  ||  Gau. HC: If Delay in Filing Matri. Appeal Not Satisfactorily Expl., Bar Against Remarriage Not Applic  ||  Bombay High Court: Release of Film "Shaadi Ke Director Karan Aur Johar" Restrained  ||  Mad. HC: Separate Norms for Transgender Persons in Employment and Education    

Vijay Sagar Vs. VSR Infratech Pvt. Ltd. - (Real Estate Regulatory Authority) (28 Feb 2019)

Promoter is liable to pay interest to the complainant on failure to fulfil his obligation

MANU/RR/0308/2019

Property

A complaint was filed under section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 read with rule 28 of the Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 by the complainant against the promoter in respect of apartment/unit on account of violation of the section 11(4)(a) of the Act for not developing the project within stipulated period. Issue raised in present case is whether developer had violated terms and conditions of space buyer's agreement.

The authority came across that, the Respondent has delayed in providing the possession and completion of project. The promoters have violated the agreement by not giving the possession on the due date i.e. 25th September, 2016 as per the agreement, thus, the authority is of the view that the promoter has failed to fulfill his obligation under section 11(4)(a) of the Act, 2016. As the promoter has failed to fulfill his obligation under section 11(4)(a), the promoter is liable under Section 18(1) proviso to pay interest to the complainant, at the prescribed rate i.e. 10.75%, for every month of delay till the handing over of possession under section 18(1). However, the status of the project is not known.

With respect to the issue of refund, the Respondent submitted that the project is registered with the authority and the occupation certificate has already been received by the respondent on 7th March, 2018 and the revised date of possession of the booked unit was 30th June, 2018, thus the delayed period of possession that is 06 months and 7 days may be deducted from the total period of delay. Therefore, refund at this stage would hamper the interest of the other allottees.

The Respondent is directed to pay the complainant delayed possession charges w.e.f. 25th September, 2016 minus the period i.e. 06 months and 07 days in which the matter was sub-judice. The Respondent is further directed not to charge any maintenance charges and administrative charges from the complainant. The complaint is disposed off accordingly.

Tags : DELAYED POSSESSION   INTEREST   LEGALITY  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved