Last Updated on February 8, 2022 by Satish Mishra
Delay in Possession of a Flat in Mona City Homes Township case before RERA Punjab Authority wherein Refund granted along with interest for deficiency in services.
Mona City Homes Complaint for Delay in Possession Punjab RERA
TITLE: MONA TOWNSHIP CASE
INTRODUCTION
Section 18 of the RERA talks about the return of amount and compensation.
“If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or building,— (a) in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or (b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registration under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act.”
Also Read- Mona Township Pvt Ltd Consumer Complaint – Top Law Firm …
FACTS OF THE CASE
An apartment in the project ‘Mona City homes’ developed by the respondents was booked by the complainant on 18.06.2017 for a total price of Rs.31 ,76,800/ -. The Buyers’ Agreement was entered into between the parties on 21.06.2017 and it was mentioned therein that the respondents shall endeavour to offer possession of the apartment within 12 months from the date of allotment. Delivery of possession however delayed, md the present complaint was filed on 03.07.2020. It is alleged therein that a total payment of Rs.30,40,000/ – had been made to the respondents, but despite that the possession of the apartment had been oddly delayed. The relief sought in the complaint accordingly is delivery of possession of the apartment, and payment of interest at the rate of 12% per annum (as stipulated in clause 29(d) of the Buyers’ Agreement) for the period of delay in handing over possession.
Also Read- Gurmeet Singh vs Mona Township Pvt. Ltd. on 25 January, 2019
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
COMPLAINANTS ARGUMENTS
The complainant already took the possession of the flat while the proceedings were still on and they found out that the water purifier, wall paper and geyser was not installed as per the promise by the respondent. The complainant in the written argument submitted that the time of giving delievery was lapsed and had sent any complaints regarding it to the respondents and were also paying the EMI’s of the loan taken by them for the apartment. The complaints were not responded by the respondent illicitly and the possession was given after delay of two years on 3.10.2020. thus the present complaint
Also Read- Orders/ Judgements – RERA Punjab against Mona Township Private Limited
RESPONDENTS ARGUMNETS
It is contended in the reply that the respondents stood by the terms of the Agreement dated 2 1.0b.2017. However, the project had got delayed due to extraneous factors such as enforcement of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 and introduction of the Goods and Service Tax in 2017. These developments necessitated that the respondent no. 1 had to reorient its working, causing delay in the completion of the project. It is also alleged that some allottees like the present one had not paid the due amounts at the stipulated time and had therefore also caused the delay in timely execution of the project.
The possession was given to the complainant on 07.01.2019 but the complainant had not paid the whole amount of Rs. 31,76,800. They had only paid 28,82,000.
FINDINGS OF THE COURT
After hearing the parties the court found that the delivery of the possession of the apartment was delayed by the respondent and this comes under the Sec. 18 of the RERA Act and the complainant is entitled to the relief.
Also Read- Delay in Possession of Property
CONCLUSION
Interest @ 9.30 as per the Sec. 16 of the RERA Act till the time between 01.07.2018 to 3.10.2020 and the respondent is required to remove all the deficiency of the apartment as mentioned in the written statement of the complaints.
JUDGEMNT REGARDING THIS TOPIC
Recently in the case of Suresh V Swamy v/s Larsen and Turbo Limited, the Maharashtra Real Estate Regulatory Authority (MahaRERA) has given its judgment in which similar order has been passed by the court.
For case specific advice, please connect with Top Best Expert Legal Consultants Attorneys in Real Estate/Property Estate/Consumer Court and Consumer Protection Dispute/ Consumer Grievances and Complaints/RERA Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.
More on 99888-17966.
