Haryana RERA Directs Ninaniya Estates To Pay Interest And Assured Returns To Complainant
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed Ninaniya Estates Ltd, the builder, to pay interest and assured returns to the complainant who had booked a retail shop and was expecting possession by 16.11.2021. Earlier in 2012, the complainant had booked a suite in the builder's project named Prism Executive Suites. However,...
Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed Ninaniya Estates Ltd, the builder, to pay interest and assured returns to the complainant who had booked a retail shop and was expecting possession by 16.11.2021.
Earlier in 2012, the complainant had booked a suite in the builder's project named Prism Executive Suites. However, in 2017, the complainant exchanged the suite for a retail shop in the builder's other project named Prism Portico.
Background Facts
The complainant booked a suite in the builder's project named "Prism Executive Suites", through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 21.01.2012, with a total sale consideration of Rs. 39,60,000. The complainant paid Rs. 30,00,000 to the builder.
However, despite receiving over 75% of the payment, the builder failed to deliver possession of the suite even after more than five years.
The builder also did not adhere to Clause 2 & 4 of the MoU, which promised regular assured returns until possession was handed over. In reality, the complainant received assured returns for only a few months starting from 2012. The complainant was initially assured that the project would be completed within three years, but by 2015, the project was far from completion.
In 2016, the builder informed the complainant that construction was complete and the suite was at the pre-possession stage, but possession was delayed. By 2017, the complainant had paid Rs. 41,62,500, exceeding the original agreed amount. The complainant was finally offered possession on 24.04.2017 but was asked to clear pending dues of Rs. 2,13,600.
In 2017, the builder proposed an exchange of the suite for a retail shop in the new "Prism Portico" project, which was also being developed by the builder. The complainant agreed, and a new buyer's agreement was signed on 16.01.2018 for a retail shop with a basic sale price of Rs. 41,62,500. The amount paid for the 2012 suite was fully adjusted towards the initial payment for the new unit.
Further, the 2018 MoU promised assured returns of Rs. 49,602 per month for 36 months starting from 16.01.2018. However, the complainant received these returns for only a few months. Despite paying the full sale consideration and an additional Rs. 10,71,408, the builder adjusted this payment against pending assured returns without providing delayed interest.
Therefore, being aggrieved by the builder's conduct, Complainant filed complaint before the authority seeking possession, delay interest and assured returns as per MoU.
Observation and Direction by Authority
The Authority held that after the execution of the New agreement on 16.01.2018, all the previous contractual relationships between the complainant and the builder under the previous agreement were superseded. Therefore, relief with respect to the previous contract cannot be granted.
The Authority referred to Clause 6 of the MoU entered into between the builder and the complainant on 16.01.2018, which stipulated that the builder would pay an assured return of Rs. 49,602 per month from 16.01.2018 until 16.01.2021 (36 months).
Based on the terms stipulated under Clause 6, the Authority held that the builder had failed to fulfill its obligation, thus the liability of the builder to pay assured returns is still continuing. Therefore, the Authority directed the builder to pay assured returns to the complainant from 16.01.2018 until 16.01.2021 after deducting the amount already paid by the builder.
Furthermore, the Authority also referred to Clause 5 of the MoU, which stipulated that the possession of the retail shop was supposed to be offered within 40 months from the date of the execution of the agreement or the start of construction, whichever is later, plus a 6-month grace period.
Based on the terms stipulated under Clause 5, the Authority held that the builder was supposed to deliver possession of the retail shop by 16.11.2021. Therefore, the builder's failure to respect the terms of the contract makes the complainant eligible to receive interest as per Section 18(1) of RERA, 2016.
Therefore, the Authority directed the builder to pay interest to the complainant for failing to hand over possession of the retail shop at the stipulated time at the rate of 11.10% per annum.
Case – Gunita Singh V/s Ninaniya Estates Ltd. A/W another
Citation - Complaint No. 410 of 2024 A/W another