Haryana RERA Directs Savyasachi Infrastructure To Refund Amount With Interest To Complainant Who Booked Commercial Unit

Background Facts

In 2017, the builder (Respondent) launched a project named Amaya Greens under the Deen Dayal Jan Awas Yojna at Sector-3, Gurugram and invited applications from buyers. The builder assured that the necessary building plan approvals had been obtained.

Relying on these assurances, the complainant booked a commercial unit in the project by paying Rs. 2,00,000 as booking amount on 2nd September 2021. The total cost of the unit was Rs. 21,40,000 and a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed on 3rd December 2021.

The builder promised to execute the buyer agreement within two months and deliver possession within 12 months from the date of the MoU. Based on this, the complainant paid Rs. 11,40,000. However, the builder failed to execute the buyer agreement and did not hand over possession even after a delay of more than a year.

Despite repeated follow-ups, the builder did not allow the complainant to visit the site and kept delaying possession. The builder also charged the complainant based on super area instead of carpet area. The payment plan was structured in a way that most of the payment was collected early even though the project remained incomplete.

Feeling aggrieved, the complainant approached the Authority seeking possession and interest for the delay. However, the complainant later requested a refund, as construction had not started and there was uncertainty regarding the project's completion.

Observation and Direction by Authority

Authority referred to the relevant findings of the enquiry committee which it had appointed in the case titled Sunil Kumar & Anr. v. Savyasachi Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. (CR/5512/2022) to assess the status of the project.

Enquiry Committee found that the Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), Haryana had issued a completion certificate on 11.01.2021 for a project under license number 37 of 2017. This certificate was only for 9.0375 acres of land. The remaining 3.125 acres were not licensed by DTCP, Haryana and were also not registered with the Authority.

Authority observed that the unit booked by the complainant falls within the unlicensed and unregistered area of 3.125 acres. Since the unit is part of an area that does not have the required approvals, the complainant has chosen to withdraw from the project.

Authority observed that even after more than 2.5 years, the construction of the unit is still incomplete and the builder has not offered possession to the complainant. It held that the complainant cannot be expected to wait indefinitely for possession, especially after having paid more than 80% of the total sale consideration.

Authority referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in Newtech Promoters v. State of U.P. (LL 2021 SC 641), which was reiterated in Sana Realtors v. Union of India (SLP Civil No. 13005 of 2020). The Court held that the allottee's right to seek a refund under Section 18(1)(a) and Section 19(4) of the RERA Act is absolute and unconditional.

Therefore, the Authority directed the builder to refund the entire amount of Rs. 11,00,000 received from the complainant, along with interest at the rate of 10.10% per annum from the date of each payment until the actual realization of the amount.

Authority also directed its Planning Branch to take necessary action under the RERA Act, 2016 for violation of the proviso to Section 3(1) as the builder sold units without obtaining registration and license.

Case – Mr. Karam Singh Versus M/s Savyasachi Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & anr

Citation – Complainant No - 4465 of 2023

Date – 2^nd April, 2025