Supreme Court Awards Rs. 6 Lakh to Man Acquitted After 6 Years, Faults UP Police Probe  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Can Restore Power on 50% Deposit in Arbitrary Theft Assessments  ||  Supreme Court: Cooperative Society Cannot Deny RTI Records as Personal if Registrar Can Access Them  ||  SC: CoC Cannot Withdraw Approved Resolution Plan Over Improved Corporate Debtor Finances  ||  Delhi High Court: 24-Week Limit Alone Cannot Restrict Medical Termination of Pregnancy  ||  Allahabad High Court Rejects Challenge to 18% GST on Online Legal Database Services  ||  Madras High Court: FIR Registration Does Not Decide Guilt; Prior Hearing of Accused Not Required  ||  Kerala High Court Orders Speedy Prosecution Sanction Process in Sabarimala Gold Theft Case  ||  Allahabad HC: Missing RT-PCR Report Cannot Bar COVID-19 Compensation if Records Confirm Infection  ||  MP High Court Directs Indore Police to Deploy Volunteers for Reporting Noise Pollution Violations    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved