| Party Dtls | Self / Adv Name | District | Current Status | Next Date of Hearing | Complaint Dispatched | Complaint Dispatched On | Dispatched Tracking Id | Complaint Dispatched Remarks | First-Hearing/Scrutinized Remarks | View Notice |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMITA GUHA ARJUN GUHA V/S ANSAL PHALAK INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. |
ANSHUMAN ASHOK | GURUGRAM | DISPOSED | NOT REQUIRED | Not Yet | FIRST HEARING | -- |
| S No. | Complaint-ID | Complaint-Type | Status | Next Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | RERA-GRG-5178-2023 | Execution | PENDING | 25-Aug-2025 |
| Date of Hearing | Status | Proceedings of the day | Bench | Order | Order Uploaded On |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 25-Jan-2023 | DISPOSED | Order pronounced. Refund is allowed alongwith prescribed rate of interest i.e. 10.60% per annum payable from the due dates of each instalment as already agreed in MoU by both the parties. Detailed order will follow. Complaint stands disposed off. File be consigned to the registry. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA | View Order | 04-Feb-2023 |
| 22-Dec-2022 | PENDING | Proceedings were adjourned due to administrative reasons. Therefore, no hearings. Adjourned to 25.01.2023 for the purpose as already fixed. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA | View Order | 25-Jan-2023 |
| 02-Nov-2022 | PENDING | The present complaint was filed on 18.02.2020 and reply on behalf of respondent was received on 18.08.2022 File has been received from the Adjudicating Officer in view of the judgment dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Apex Court in case titled as M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd Versus State of U.P. and Ors. (2021-22(1) RCR(Civil) 357) wherein it was held that the matters regarding refund and interest under sec. 18(1) are to be decided by the authority and matters regarding adjudging compensation to be decided by the adjudicating officer. The application filed in the form CAO with the adjudicating officer and on being transferred to the authority in view of the judgement quoted above, the issue before authority is whether the authority should proceed further without seeking fresh application in the form CRA for cases of refund along with prescribed interest in case allottee wishes to withdraw from the project on failure of the promoter to give possession as per agreement for sale. It has been deliberated in the proceedings dated 10.5.2022 in CR No. 3688/2021 titled Harish Goel Versus Adani M2K Projects LLP and it is observed that there is no material difference in the contents of the forms and the different headings whether it is filed before the adjudicating officer or the authority. Keeping in view the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case titled as M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd Versus State of U.P. and Ors. (Supra), the authority is proceeding further in the matter where allottee wishes to withdraw from the project and the promoter has failed to give possession of the unit as per agreement for sale irrespective of the fact whether application has been made in form CAO/ CRA. Both the parties proceeded further in the matter accordingly. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Varun Pahwa v/s Renu Chaudhary, Civil appeal no. 2431 of 2019 decided on 01.03.2019 has ruled that procedures are hand made in the administration of justice and a party should not suffer injustice merely due to some mistake or negligence or technicalities. Accordingly, the authority is proceeding further to decide the matter based on the facts mentioned in the complaint and the reply received from the respondent and submissions made by both the parties during the proceedings. Succinct facts of the case as per complaint and annexures are as under: S. N. Particulars Details 1. Name and location of the project “Versalia”, Sector 67-A, Gurugram 2. Nature of the project Residential Plotted Colony 3. Project area 38.262 acres 4. DTCP license no. 81 of 2013 dated 19.09.2013 valid upto 19.09.2019 5. Name of licensee Lord Krishna Infra Projects Ltd. and 13 others 6. RERA Registered/ not registered 154 of 2017 dated 28.08.2017 valid upto 31.08.2020 7. Allotment Letter 26.10.2013 (Annexure 5 at page 36 of complaint) 8. Unit no. 4162, Ground Floor (Page 41 of the complaint) 9. Unit area admeasuring (super area) 3333 sq. ft. (Page 41 of the complaint) 10. Date of Floor Buyer Agreement 20.10.2014 (Page 40 of complaint) 11. Possession clause 5. Possession of Floor 5.1. Subject to Clause 5.2 infra and further subject to all the buyers of the Floors in the Residential Colony nuking timely payment, the Company shall endeavor to complete the development of Residential Colony and the Floor as far as possible within 36 months with an extended period of (6) six months from the date of execution of this Floor buyer agreement subject to the receipt of requisite building /revised building plans/ other approvals & permissions from the concerned authorities, as well as Force Majeure Conditions as defined in the agreement and subject to fulfillment of the Terms and Conditions of the Allotment, Certificate & Agreement including but not limited to timely payments by the Buyer(s), in terms hereof. The Company shall be entitled to extension of time for completion of construction of the Unit equivalent to the period of delay caused on account of the reasons stated above. No claim by way of damages/compensation shall lie against the Company in case of delay in handing over possession of the Unit on account of the aforesaid reasons. However, if the Buyer(s) opts to pay in advance of schedule, à suitable discount may be allowed but the completion schedule shall remain unaffected. The Buyer(s) agrees and understands that the construction will commence only after all necessary approvals are received from the concerned authorities and competent authorities including but not limited to Environment & Forest (Emphasis supplied) 12. Due date of possession 20.04.2018 (calculated as 36 months from the date of execution of Floor Buyer’s Agreement plus 6 months of grace period as the same is unqualified) Note: Grace Period is allowed. 13. Total sale consideration Rs. 1,92,32,400/- (As per payment plan at annexure 2 of BBA on page 71 of complaint) 14. Amount paid by the complainant Rs. 67,45,105/- (As mentioned by complainant in CAO on page 19 and also confirmed by respondent on page 1 of written submissions) 15. Surrender Letter 15.02.2018 (Page 82 of complaint) 16. Occupation certificate Not obtained The counsels for the complainant as well as respondents admit that MoU was signed between the parties on 03.04.2019 for refund of an amount of Rs.97,46,016/- as full and final settlement towards the cost of surrender unit No.GF-4162 in lieu of all claims of the second party including allotment, refund, interest etc. However, the counsel for the complainant states that no amount has been paid in furtherance to the MoU. The counsel for the respondent agrees to refund the amount as per MoU minus any amount that has already been paid to the complainant in furtherance to the MoU. The counsel for the respondent further states that in case any interest is awarded to the complainant, the same may be exempted for the Covid period ( as per the Hon’ble Supreme Court Moratorium). Arguments heard. Order reserved. Matter to come up on 22.12.2022 for pronouncement of order. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA | View Order | 11-Nov-2022 |
| 22-Sep-2022 | PENDING | In order to constitute new bench and to revised roaster of cases, matter is adjourned to 02.11.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 07-Oct-2022 |
| 10-Aug-2022 | PENDING | The present complaint has been filed on 18.02.2020 and the reply has been received so it has been proceeded ex parte vide order dated 10.02.2021. So, the authority is proceeding as per the pleadings and documents on the record. The respondent has submitted written arguments on 25.11.2021 File has been received on transfer from Adjudicating Officer in view of the judgment dated 11.11.2021 passed by the Apex Court in case bearing no. SLP(Civil) No(s). 37113715 OF 2021) titled as M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd Versus State of U.P. and Ors. as matter regarding refund and interest under sec 18(1) are to be decided by the authority and matters regarding adjudging compensation to be decided by the Adjudicating officer. Today, Shri Deeptanshu Jain Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent and requests for filing the reply. Heard. Request is allowed. He is directed to submit the reply in the registry within 2 weeks with an advance copy to the complainant. Matter to come up on 22.09.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 22-Aug-2022 |
| 21-Jan-2022 | PENDING | In view of judgment dated 11.11.2021 in title- M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt Ltd. Vs State of UP & Ors. Etc. passed by the Apex Court, this forum has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaint in hands.File be transferred to the Authority. Reader is directed to send the file immediately. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 02-Feb-2022 |
| 15-Dec-2021 | PENDING | THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 21.01.2022. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 14-Jun-2023 |
| 25-Nov-2021 | PENDING | To come on 15.12.2021 for further proceedings. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 25-Jan-2022 |
| 03-Nov-2021 | PENDING | Order is not ready due to overwork. To come on 25.11.2021 for order. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 08-Nov-2021 |
| 15-Sep-2021 | PENDING | Arguments heard. Learned counsel for respondent requests for permission to file written submissions. Be filed at least two days before next date. 2. To come on 03.11.2021 for order. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 20-Sep-2021 |
| 08-Jul-2021 | PENDING | Proxy counsel submits that arguing counsel Mr. Gagan Sharma, could not come to court today as he had no information of the matter fixed for today. 2. To come on 15.09.2021 for arguments. | RAJINDER KUMAR | View Order | 23-Jul-2021 |
| 19-Apr-2021 | PENDING | Due to increase in the Covid-19 cases, case is not being taken up for hearing. Hence, as per directions of the Hon’ble Authority, it is being adjourned to 08.07.2021 for the proceedings already fixed. 2. Both the parties be informed accordingly through e-mail. | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 22-Apr-2021 |
| 10-Feb-2021 | PENDING | In pursuance to notice, the complainants put in appearance through there counsel. 2. None is present on behalf of the respondent. A perusal of the case file shows that on previous date Mr. Gagan Sharma, Adv on behalf of the respondent was present. A notice for his presence was issued to the respondent through e-mail. But despite that none has turned up on its behalf. So, it shows that the respondent is not interested to contest the claim of the claimants and as such are ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte. 3. For arguments, matter be put up on 19.04.2021. | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 17-Feb-2021 |
| 07-Dec-2020 | PENDING | THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 10.02.2021 | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | --- | --- |
| 12-Oct-2020 | PENDING | Both the parties put in appearance through their respective counsel. 2. Reply is not ready. 3. Before proceedings further, the respondent is directed to file written reply alongwith complete list of documents consisting of sanctioned plan of the project, statement of account of the complainant’s unit, environment clearance certificate, copy of BBA and the latest status report of the project duly verified by a responsible person connected with the construction department by way of an affidavit with an advance copy to the complainant 10 days prior to the date fixed. 4.The matter put upon 07.12.2020 for arguments. | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 14-Oct-2020 |
| 19-Aug-2020 | PENDING | DUE TO COVID-19 PANDEMIC, THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 12.10.2020 | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 19-Aug-2020 |
| 22-May-2020 | PENDING | DUE TO LOCKDOWN, THE MATTER IS ADJOURNED TO 19.08.2020 | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 01-Jun-2020 |
| 03-Apr-2020 | FIRST HEARING | Due to Lockdown, the matter is adjourned to 22.05.2020 | SUBHASH CHAND GOYAL | View Order | 27-May-2020 |
| Date of Judgement | Party Details | Judgement Uploading Date | View Judgement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 25-Jan-2023 | AMITA GUHA ARJUN GUHA V/S ANSAL PHALAK INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. |
09-Mar-2023 |
|
| Dak ID | Receiving Date | Submitted By | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7536 | 18/02/2020 | ANSHUMAN ASHOK | NEW COMPLAINT |
| 25463 | 02/11/2021 | KNM LAW PARTNERS | FILE VAKALATNAMA |
| 27939 | 25/01/2022 | KNM AND PARTNERS | APP ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT FOR REJECTION OF COMPLAINT |
| 26768 | 14/12/2021 | KNM AND PARTNERS | FILE VAKALATNAMA |
| 39762 | 18/08/2022 | KNM AND PARTNERS LAW OFFICES | REPLY RECEIVED |
| 61103 | 31/10/2023 | MUKUL KUMAR SANWARIYA ADV | CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER. |
Web Information Manager
Shri Arvind Mehtani,Executive Director, HRERA
Mini Secretariat, New Office Block,
2nd & 3rd Floor ,Sector-1,
Panchkula,
Haryana- 134114,India
Email: hrerapkl[dash]hry[at]gov[dot]in
Telephone: +91 172-2584232,2585232
Website Designed and Developed By National Informatics Centre (NIC) and Owned by HRERA PANCHKULA & HRERA GURUGRAM Jointly
© 2018 Copyright. All Rights Reserved.