Rajasthan RERA Rejects Homebuyer's Complaint For The Basement Parking Facility, Holding That It Was Never Part Of The Approved Construction Plan.
The Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RJRERA) consisting of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer) rejected the homebuyer's complaint for basement parking facility, holding that it was never part of the approved construction plan, while hearing the seven complaint matter against the builder. Background Fact The Homebuyers (Complainants) reside in the Builder's...
The Rajasthan Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RJRERA) consisting of Justice RS Kulhari (Adjudicating Officer) rejected the homebuyer's complaint for basement parking facility, holding that it was never part of the approved construction plan, while hearing the seven complaint matter against the builder.
Background Fact
The Homebuyers (Complainants) reside in the Builder's (Respondent) Housing project named “Unique Anmol”. They have paid the consideration amount for their respective flats and have already moved into their units.
In this complaint, the Homebuyers allege that the agreement for sale mentioned a basement and six floors, yet no basement has been constructed by the builder for vehicle parking. Additionally, they claim that essential facilities such as fire safety equipment, solid waste management facilities, sewage treatment plants, and rooftop solar systems, as per the approved plan, have not been installed.
Despite making payments for amenities like the gym, community hall, badminton court, and volleyball ground, no construction progress has been made. Furthermore, the quality of construction is poor, and GST has been incorrectly levied.
The homebuyers have filed a complaint in the Rajasthan RERA, where they are seeking the completion of the project as per the approved plan, including the construction of basement parking for residents. Moreover, they are requesting all facilities as outlined in the approved plan and brochure, along with compensation for mental agony, financial loss, and breach of trust.
Contention of Builder
The builder contended that the project was completed in accordance with the approved plan issued by the UIT Sikar. They contended that the basement was never intended to be part of the project, attributing its mention in Form-G to a typographical error. They mentioned that this mistake was rectified through an application filed before the RJRERA Authority, which was approved on October 15, 2022, resulting in an amendment to Form-G. Similar errors were made in the execution of sale deeds, also referencing the non-existent basement.
Furthermore, the builder maintains that the competent authority has approved a plan consisting of a ground floor plus six floors. They state that provisions for open parking for 1308 two-wheelers, along with 14 car parking spaces, have been duly provided. The amenities such as the gym, community hall, badminton court, and volleyball ground have been constructed as per the approved plan. Additionally, solar panels have been installed, and a fire NOC has been obtained.
RERA Verdict
Rajasthan RERA noted that while the word 'basement' was mentioned in the sale deeds and Form-G, the respondent clarified that it was erroneously included and not part of the approved plan or affordable housing policy. RERA approved the modification through its order dated October 15, 2022. Furthermore, the project plan approved by UIT Sikar indicates a ground floor plus six floors, with parking for 1308 two-wheelers and 14 cars specified. No mention of a basement for parking is found in the approval. Hence, the Homebuyers contention regarding the basement and parking therein is deemed untenable, as it relies on a clerical or typographical error.
On the second issue related to the sewage treatment plant, rooftop solar system, construction of community hall, and badminton court, RERA held that the promoter submitted photos of the site and a completion certificate from the empanelled architect, indicating that all facilities have been provided. The Homebuyers did not refute these documents. Therefore, there is no reason to doubt their authenticity. Thus, objections regarding these issues lack merit.
On the last contention regarding fire safety arrangements, RERA holds that the completion report reveals the installation of a fire system in the project, supported by the photos filed in the report. Thus, the homebuyers claim lacks substance.
In conclusion, the RJRERA dismissed the complaint filed by the homebuyers against the builder. The RJRERA held that the parking facility was never part of the construction plan. Additionally, it noted that other amenities were duly constructed and implemented by the builder.
Case : Jagdish Dan, Virender Kumar, Gaju Dan, Rameshwar lal, Dhruv Pal, Ram Prakash and Jagdish Dhan Versus Unique Shree Shyam Landhomes LLP.
Citation : Complaint Nos. 2022-5197, 5210, 5215, 5230, 5231, 5232, 5233
Complaints Counsel : Mr. Karan Palawat
Respondent Counsel : Mr. Harshal Tholia