Real Estate Monthly Digest : December 2024

Haryana RERA Directs Anant Raj Builders To Pay Interest, Execute Conveyance Deed In Favor Of Homebuyer

Case – Mohit Bansal Versus M/s. Anant Raj Ltd

Citation – Complaint No: 6493 Of 2022

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising of Ashok Sangwan (Member) has directed M/s. Anant Raj Ltd to pay interest for delay and execute conveyance deed in the favour of Homebuyer.

Delay Of More Than 2.7 Years In Completing Construction Of Project, Haryana RERA Orders Raheja Developers To Refund Rs. 27.98 Lakhs To Homebuyer

Case – Arun Shrivastava Versus M/S Raheja Developers Limited

Citation – Complaint no 4974 of 2023

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed M/S Raheja Developers Limited to refund ₹27.98 Lakhs with interest to homebuyer who purchased a flat in their Raheja Maheshwara Project.

Inordinate Delay Of More Than 10 Years, Haryana RERA Directs Ansal Builders To Refund 1.07 Crores To Homebuyer

Case – Sheela Srivastava & others Versus M/s Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd.

Citation – Complaint no: 805 of 2023

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member) has directed M/s Ansal Housing and Constructions Limited to refund Rs. 1.07 crores with 11.10% interest to the homebuyer after facing an inordinate delay of more than 10 years in receiving possession of the flat.

Initially, the homebuyer was allotted a flat in 2013. Due to delays the homebuyer's booking was transferred to another project twice, making it a total of three times. According to the final Floor Buyer's Agreement the builder was supposed to hand over possession of the flat by 21st July 2022.

Haryana RERA - No Additional Compensation To Homebuyer When Interest For Delayed Possession Already Granted

Case – Mr. Raghav Manocha & Abhinav Manocha Versus M/s. Emaar MGF Land Limited

Citation – Complaint No: 13 of 2024

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) Bench comprising Rajender Kumar (Adjudicating Officer) dismissed the homebuyer's complaint against M/s. Emaar MGF Land Limited seeking additional compensation.

Authority held that no additional compensation can be granted to the homebuyer when delay possession compensation has already been granted along with interest under Section 18(1) of the RERA, 2016.

Haryana RERA Orders Vatika Builders To Refund Rs. 84.34 Lakhs To Homebuyer For Delayed Possession

Case – Avinash Lal & another Versus M/s Vatika Sovereign Park Private Limited

Citation – Complaint No: 744 of 2023

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed M/s Vatika Sovereign Park Private Limited to refund ₹84.34 Lakhs with interest to homebuyer. The homebuyer, who booked the flat in 2016, was expecting possession by November 2020.

Haryana RERA Directs Signature Global To Pay Interest To Homebuyer Of Affordable Group Housing Project

Case – Vashisht Arora Versus Signature Global (India) Private Ltd

Citation – Complaint no: 5131 of 2023

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Ashok Sangwan (Member), has directed M/s Signature Global India Private Limited to pay interest to homebuyer from its Affordable Group Housing Project for delayed possession.

Affordable housing projects in Haryana provide housing unit at set prices and size for people with below-average household incomes.

Haryana RERA Holds Emaar India Right In Charging Rs. 34.75 Lakh For External And Infrastructure Development Charges

Case – Mrs. Milli Jain & Anr Versus M/s Emaar India Limited.

Citation – Complainant no 1656 of 2022

Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising Arun Kumar (Chairman), Vijay Kumar Goyal (Member) and Ashok Sangwan (Member) held that Emaar India was right in charging Rs. 34.75 lakhs from the complainant as External Development Charges (EDC) and Infrastructure Development Charges (IDC).

Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Himachal RERA Rejects Homebuyer's Structural Defect Complaint Filed More Than 10 Years After Taking Possession

Case – Abeer Sharma Versus Sushma

Citation – Complaint No. HPRERA2024007/C

Himachal Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising Justice Srikant Baldi (Chairperson) rejected homebuyer's structural defect complaint, holding it to be time-barred as it was filed more than 10 years after taking possession.

However, the Authority found that the project in which the homebuyer purchased a flat was eligible to be registered under Section 3 of RERA, 2016. Therefore, the Authority directed the builder to register the project with RERA within one month.

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Karnataka RERA Directs Ozone Urbana Infra Developers To Refund Rs. 1.02 Crores To Homebuyer

Case Title – Gagan Chaturvedi Versus Ozone Urbana Infra Developers Private Limited

Case Citation – Compliant No: 01016/2023

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising Neelmani N Raju (Member) has directed Ozone Urbana Infra Developers to refund Rs. 1.02 crores to the homebuyer after the builder failed to provide assured returns, pay Pre-EMIs and hand over the possession of the flat on time.

Monthly assured returns projects are schemes in which builders guarantee to pay homebuyers a fixed amount at regular intervals, typically monthly or for a designated period.

Karnataka RERA Dismisses Real Estate Agent's Complaint Against Godrej Properties, Citing Vindictive Motive

Case – Vivek Arjuna Versus Godrej Properties

Citation – Complaint No: 00058 /2024

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising of Rakesh Singh (Chairperson), Neelmani N Raju (Member) and GR Reddy (Member) dismissed the complaint filed by a real estate agent seeking the revocation of Godrej Properties (Builder) project registration for advertising the project before registering it with the Authority.

The Authority finds that the agent filed the complaint with a vindictive motive after being excluded from negotiations with the property owners by the builder.

Karnataka RERA Orders Dharwad-Based Builder To Refund ₹38.8 Lakhs To Homebuyer Due To Delay

Case – Shreepad G Shindgikar and Rahul Shindgikar Versus Skytown Builders and Developers

Citation – Complaint No: CMP/211005/0008417

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising Neelmani N. Raju (Member) has directed the Dharwad-based builder named Skytown Builders and Developers to refund ₹38.8 lakhs to the homebuyer after the builder failed to provide possession of the flat on time.
Karnataka RERA Holds Shrivision Homes Liable For Delayed Possession, Orders 30.2 Lakhs Interest To Homebuyer

Case – Santosh Kumar Sahu & others Versus M/S Shrivision Homes Pvt. Ltd

Citation – Complaint No: 00357/ 2024

Karnataka Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench, comprising GR Reddy (Member), has directed M/S Shrivision Homes Pvt. Ltd to pay Rs. 30.2 Lakhs to the homebuyer as interest for delay in handing over possession of the flat.

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Using Poor Quality Material During Construction: NCDRC Holds Builder Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Abdul Gagoor Vs. Jose K.V

Case Number: R.P. No. 1302/2019

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by AVM J. Rajendra, held that usage of subpar resources for construction amounts to deficiency in service.

Failing To Deliver Possession Within Stipulated Period: NCDRC Holds TDI Infrastructure Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: M/S. TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Anita

Case Number: F.A. No. 890/2021

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, presided by Mr. Subhash Chandra and Dr. Sadhna Shanker held TDI Infrastructure liable for deficiency in service over delay in handing over possession of the property as per the builder-buyer agreement.

Delhi State Commission

Failure To Meet Contractual Obligations: Delhi State Commission Holds TDI Infrastructure Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Mr. Raman Singla Vs. TDI Infrastructure Ltd

Case Number: C.C. No. 1231/2018

The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal and Ms. Pinki held TDI Infrastructure liable for deficiency in service due to non fulfillment of contractual obligations and delay in handing over the possession.

Parallel Proceedings On Same Issue In Different Forums Impermissible: Delhi State Commission Overturns District Commission's Order Against Philips Cooperative Group Housing

Case Title: Philips Cooperative Group Housing Society (Regd No.1024) Vs Mr.D.S. Kundu

Case Number: F.A. No. 100/2020

The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal and Ms. Pinki held that parallel proceedings on the same issue in different forums are not permissible, as this could lead to judicial contradictions.

Failing To Refund Advances As Per Agreed Terms: Delhi State Commission Holds TDI Infracorp Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Mr. R.P. Phulia Vs TDI Infracorp Ltd. And Ors.

Case Number: C.C. No. 875/2018

The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, Ms. Pinki held that failing to refund advances as per the terms of the agreement amounts to deficiency in service.

Delay In Handing Possession And Failure To Refund : Delhi State Commission Holds J.M. Housing Ltd Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Mrs. Vijaywati Tiwari Vs. M/S J.M. Housing Ltd

Case Number: C.C. No. 936/2017

The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, Ms. Pinki held that a delay in handing possession to the buyer is a continuous wrong and failure to refund for the same, amounts to deficiency in service.

Delay In Possession A Continuous Cause of Action: Delhi State Commission Holds Raheja Developers Liable For Deficiency In Service

Case Title: Ms. Priya Sachdev Vs. M/S Raheja builder. s Pvt. Ltd.

Case Number: C.C. No. 77/2021

The Delhi State Commission, presided by Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, Ms. Pinki held that a continuous delay in handing over the possession is a continuous cause of action and amounts to deficiency in service.

Failure To Hand Over Commercial Space To Purchasers Is 'Deficiency In Service': Delhi State Commission

Case name: Jai Narayan vs Parsvnath developers pvt. Ltd

Case number: Complaint Case No. 984/2019

The Delhi State Commission has held that default in delivering the commercial space by Parsvnath developers booked by the complainants is 'deficiency in service'. The bench presided by Member Bimla Kumari observed that purchasers cannot be made to wait for an indefinite period of time and thus granted adequate compensation.

Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Maharashtra RERA Directs Godrej Skyline Developers To Refund Full Booking Amount Paid By Homebuyer With Interest

Case – Ashok Babaji Sable Versus Godrej Skyline Developers Pvt Ltd

Citation – Complaint No. CC005000000064485

Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising of Ravindra Deshpande (Member-II) directed Godrej Skyline Developers Pvt Ltd to fully refund the booking amount paid by the homebuyer with interest. The bench observed that the allotment letter contained coercive terms and that the booking amount did not fall under the definition of earnest money as per the application form.

Haryana Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

Haryana State Commission Holds Ansal Properties Liable For Delay In Possession, Orders Refund And Compensation

Case title: Mrs. Neeru Bala Mahendru vs Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited & Ors.

Case No: Consumer Complaint No.481 of 2018

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana presided by Justice T.P.S Mann (President), Mr. S. P. Sood (Judicial Member) and Ms. Manjula (Member) held Ansal Properties & Infrastructure Limited liable for delay in possession of residential plot for several years. Further, the commission ordered refund and compensation for deficiency in service.

Ernakulam District Commission

Failure To Complete Construction On Time, Ernakulam District Commission Holds Builder Liable

Case Title: Karuppuswami Vs. Thodiyil Builders

Case Number: C.C. No. 111/2024

The Ernakulam District Commission, presided by Shri. D.B. Binu, Shri. V. Ramachandran and Smt. Sreevidhia T.N., in a complaint against Thodiyil Builders held that delays in handing over the possession and evidence of substandard work amounts to deficiency in service.

Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority

Telangana RERA Permits Association Of Homebuyers To Take Over Project Due To Builder's Failure

Case – Abhishek Singh Versus M/s Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt Ltd.– “Jaya Platinum Project” Along with 12 Others

Citation - Complaint No.1269 of 2023 Along with 12 Others

While invoking Section 8 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the Telangana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority) bench comprising Justice Dr. N. Satyanarayana (Chairperson), K. Srinivasa Rao (Member), and Laxmi Narayana Jannu (Member) permitted the Association of Homebuyers (allottees) to take over the project and complete it within eight months.

Section 8 allows the Authority to take necessary actions if a project's registration lapses or is revoked.

Delhi District Commission

District Commission Misapplied Supreme Court's Ruling: Chandigarh State Commission Remands Sahara Prime City Case For Fresh Adjudication

Case title: Smt. Neelima Joshi vs. Sahara Group & Ors.

Case No: Appeal No. 198 of 2024

The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh presided by Justice Raj Shekhar Attri (President) and Mr. Rajesh K. Arya (Member) held that the District Commission has misapplied the decision of Supreme Court in Pinak Pani Mohanty vs Union of India as Sahara Prime City Ltd. was not party to that case.

The State Commission remanded the case to the District Commission for fresh adjudication.

Failure To Hand Over Commercial Space To Purchasers Is 'Deficiency In Service': Delhi State Commission

Case name: Jai Narayan vs Parsvnath developers pvt. Ltd

Case number: Complaint Case No. 984/2019

The Delhi State Commission has held that default in delivering the commercial space by Parsvnath developers booked by the complainants is 'deficiency in service'. The bench presided by Member Bimla Kumari observed that purchasers cannot be made to wait for an indefinite period of time and thus granted adequate compensation.

West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal

WBREAT Upholds Order Directing Builder To Pay Over ₹56 Lakh Over Failure To Provide Possession Of Four Plots By November 2016

Case Title – M/s Janapriyo Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Versus Arindam Mitra

Citation – WBREAT/APPEAL NO. — 06/2023

West Bengal Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) bench comprising Justice Rabindranath Samanta (Chairperson), Gour Sunder Banerjee (Judicial Member) and Dr. Subrat Mukherjee (Administration Member) has provided relief to the complainant who purchased four plots by paying advance money in the builder's mini township project and was expecting possession by November 2016.

The Tribunal upheld the Authority's order directing the builder to refund the principal amount of Rs. 44,08,600/- paid by the complainant to purchase the plots, along with Rs. 12,04,849/- as interest.

Telangana State Commission

Telangana State Commission Validates Builder's Claim of Outstanding Payments

Case Title: M/s Narne Estates Pvt., Ltd. Vs. Shri Mohd. Adbul Rahim

Case Number: F.A. No. 381/2020

The Telangana State Commission, presided by Sri. V. V. Seshubabu and K. Ranga Rao allowed an appeal by Narne Estates and modified the District Commission's order. The Commission acknowledged the builder's claim of outstanding payments on behalf of the buyer and directed the buyer to clear the same.