21-Feb-2023 |
DISPOSED |
The present complaint has been received on
21.07.2022 and the reply was received on 27.10.2022.
Succinct facts of the case as per
complaint and reply are as under:
Sr.
No.
Particulars
Details
1.
Name
of the project
Gurgaon
Greens, Sector 102, Gurugram, Haryana
2.
Project area
13.531
acres
3.
Nature of the project
Group
housing colony
4.
DTCP license no.
75 of
2012 dated 31.07.2012
Valid till
30.07.2020
Name of licensee
Kamdhenu
Projects Pvt. Ltd. and another C/o Emaar MGF Land Ltd.
5.
HRERA
registered/ not registered
Registered
vide no. 36(a) of 2017 dated 05.12.2017 for 95829.92 sq. mtrs.
HRERA
registration valid up to
31.12.2018
HRERA
extension of registration vide
01
of 2019 dated 02.08.2019
Extension
valid up to
31.12.2019
6.
Unit no.
GGN-11-0202, 2nd floor, tower no. 11
[annexure C6, page 53 of complaint]
7.
Unit measuring (super area)
1650 sq. ft.
8.
Provisional allotment letter dated
25.01.2013
[annexure C5, page 45 of complaint]
9.
Date of execution of buyer’s agreement
26.03.2013
[annexure C6, page 51 of complaint]
10.
Possession clause
14. POSSESSION
(a) Time of handing over the Possession
Subject to terms of
this clause and barring force majeure conditions, subject to the Allottee
having complied with all the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and not
being in default under any of the provisions of this Agreement and compliance
with all provisions, formalities, documentation etc., as prescribed by the
Company, the Company proposes to hand over the possession of the Unit within 36 (Thirty
Six) months from the date of start of construction, subject to timely
compliance of the provisions of the Agreement by the Allottee. The Allottee
agrees and understands that the Company shall be entitled to a grace period
of 5
(five) months, for applying and obtaining the completion
certificate/occupation certificate in respect of the Unit and/or the Project.
(emphasis supplied)
[annexure C6, page 60 of complaint]
11.
Date of start of construction as per statement of account dated
29.06.2022 at page 83 of complaint
14.06.2013
12.
Due date of possession
14.06.2016
[Note:
Grace period is not included]
13.
Total consideration as per statement of account dated 29.06.2022 at
page 83 of complaint
Rs.1,00,47,678/-
14.
Total amount paid by the complainants as per
statement of account dated 29.06.2022 at page 85 of complaint
Rs.1,00,47,681/-
15.
Occupation certificate
30.05.2019
[annexure R10, page 151 of reply]
16.
Offer of possession
20.06.2019
[annexure R11, page 154 of reply]
17.
Unit handover letter dated
18.11.2019
[annexure R14A, page 166 of reply]
18.
Conveyance deed executed on
17.12.2019
[annexure R15, page 170 of reply]
19.
Delay compensation already paid by the respondent for delay in handing
over possession
Rs. 9,66,183/-
[Rs.6,44,122/- (As per settlement agreement dated 25.09.2019) +
3,86,473/- (As per letter of offer of possession)]
20.
Settlement agreement executed between the complainants and the
respondent on
25.09.2019
[annexure R12, page 159 of reply]
21.
The complaint bearing no. 3230 of 2017 was filed by the allottee
complainants before Hon’ble NCDRC, New Delhi and the same was disposed of in
the terms of settlement agreement dated 25.09.2019 on
01.11.2019
[annexure R13, page 165 of reply]
The counsel for the complainant states
that settlement agreement was signed between the complainant and the respondent
and in pursuance of which an amount of Rs.9,66,183/- was also received and the settlement was taken on record before
NCDRC in CR No.3230 of 2017 and the said complaint was disposed off by Hon’ble
NCDRC vide order dated 01.11.2019 in terms of settlement agreement dated
25.09.2019. However, the respondent promoter is demanding extra
charges at the time of handing over of possession which are not part of BBA and
were not part of complaint before NCDRC and is thus, seeking the relief as has
been granted by the authority in CR No.4031 of 2019.
The counsel for the respondent states
that all the dues demanded are part of
offer of possession which was made on 20.06.19 after obtaining OC from the
competent authority and much prior to the above settlement agreement reached
between the parties before NCDRC and the order of NCDRC had been passed in
terms of above settlement agreement and hence,
the above complaint is not
maintainable before this authority. More
over the complainant has approached this authority by filing above complaint
almost 3 years after execution of conveyance deed as well as amicable
settlement reached between the parties without any external influence and conditions of above settlement cannot be
agitated at this stage as has been held before Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP No.
9758 of 2022.
Arguments heard.
The authority of the considered vide that
the present complaint is not maintainable.
Detailed order will follow. Matter stands disposed off. File be consigned to the registry. |
VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL ASHOK SANGWAN SANJEEV KUMAR ARORA |
View Order |
28-Feb-2023 |