RERA Punjab Dismisses Delayed Possession Interest Claim After Allottee Executes Conveyance Deed and Acknowledges Possession. Suraksha Enclave (Bella Vista-2) in Derabassi, SAS Nagar (Mohali) is registered with the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Punjab under registration number PBRERA-SAS79-PR0489. The project is developed by Phenomenal Construction Private Limited and Suraksha Enclave Ipan Real Estate Pvt Ltd.
Suraksha Enclave Derabassi Case Update
- Key Takeaway for Buyers. The authority ruled that because the buyer signed a conveyance deed recording physical possession before the contractual deadline, a delay claim could not stand. RERA Punjab explicitly advised homebuyers to verify that a builder holds a valid Completion Certificate (CC) and Occupation Certificate (OC) before signing handover documents or taking possession. However, the authority left the buyer free to pursue separate compensation claims
Can an allottee claim interest for delayed possession under Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, after executing a conveyance deed that expressly records delivery and acceptance of physical possession?
The Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), in Urmila Arya v. Phenomenal Construction Private Limited and Another, Complaint No. GC No. 0358 of 2025, decided on 23 October 2026, considered this issue while examining a complaint concerning a residential plot in the project Suraksha Enclave Township (Bella Vista-2), situated at village Gholumajra, Tehsil Derabassi, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.
The Authority dismissed the complaint after finding that the conveyance deed had been executed and that its terms specifically recorded delivery and acceptance of physical possession by the allottee. On the facts of the case, it held that interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act did not arise.
The decision also clarifies the importance of the documentary record relating to possession and the distinction between a claim for delayed possession interest and a claim for compensation arising from deficiency in services.
Case Details
| Particulars | Details |
|---|---|
| Case Title | Urmila Arya v. Phenomenal Construction Private Limited and Another |
| Complaint Number | GC No. 0358 of 2025 |
| Authority | Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Punjab |
| Presiding Member | Shri Binod Kumar Singh |
| Date of Institution | 4 September 2025 |
| Date of Decision | 23 October 2026 |
| Relevant Provision | Section 18, read with Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016 |
| Project | Suraksha Enclave Township (Bella Vista-2) |
| Plot | Plot No. B-208, measuring 100 square yards |
Facts of the Case
The complainant, Urmila Arya, had booked Plot No. B-208, measuring 100 square yards, in the project Suraksha Enclave Township (Bella Vista-2).
The relevant facts, as recorded in the order, were:
- The provisional allotment letter was issued on 6 September 2019.
- The Builder-Buyer Agreement was executed on 20 September 2019.
- The total sale consideration was ₹10,35,000, which the complainant stated had been paid in full.
- Under Clause 21 of the agreement, possession was to be delivered within 24 months from the date of allotment.
- A conveyance deed was executed on 15 June 2021.
The complainant alleged that the promoter had not offered valid legal possession and that the project remained incomplete from the perspective of the statutory authorities. She further contended that the promoter had compelled her to execute the conveyance deed without first obtaining the requisite Completion Certificate/Occupation Certificate.
According to the complainant, despite repeated visits and communications, the promoter had not provided lawful possession along with the interest payable for the alleged delay.
Reliefs Sought by the Complainant
The complainant approached Punjab RERA under Section 31 of the RERA Act, 2016, seeking, among other reliefs:
- Interest on the amount of ₹10,35,000 for delayed possession, until actual legal possession after obtaining the Occupation Certificate/Completion Certificate.
- Directions to the promoter to hand over physical and legal possession after obtaining the necessary statutory approvals.
- Penalty under Section 61 of the RERA Act for alleged contravention of the Act.
- Litigation costs of ₹1,50,000.
Stand Taken by the Promoter
The respondents admitted that the complainant had booked Plot No. B-208 and that the allotment letter and Builder-Buyer Agreement had been executed.
However, they disputed the allegation of non-delivery of possession.
The promoter relied upon Clause 21 of the Builder-Buyer Agreement, stating that possession was to be offered within 24 months with an additional six-month grace period.
The respondents further submitted that:
- The conveyance deed had been executed on 15 June 2021.
- Clause 3 of the conveyance deed specifically recorded that physical possession of the plot had been delivered to and accepted by the complainant.
- The project was fully developed and equipped with essential infrastructure and basic amenities, including water supply and sewerage.
- Other allottees had already commenced construction on their respective plots.
The promoter also relied upon earlier decisions, including Nupur Hingad v. Emmar MGF Land Ltd., to contend that an objection concerning possession without a Completion Certificate or Occupation Certificate could not subsequently be raised after possession had been taken.
Arguments Advanced by the Complainant
The complainant filed a rejoinder disputing the promoter’s submissions and reiterated that execution of a conveyance deed could not, by itself, extinguish statutory rights available under the RERA Act.
She relied upon Section 17 of the RERA Act, which deals with the promoter’s obligation to execute the conveyance deed and hand over possession in accordance with law.
The complainant also referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan & Aleya Sultan v. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd., contending that execution of a conveyance deed or sale deed does not automatically prevent an allottee from pursuing claims for compensation arising from delayed possession or deficiency in service.
Reliance was also placed on decisions of the Haryana RERA Appellate Tribunal and the Allahabad High Court concerning the circumstances in which an allottee’s rights may not be defeated by execution of agreements or conveyance documents.
Issue Before Punjab RERA
The central question considered by the Authority was:
Whether the complainant was entitled to interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act on the ground of delayed possession when the conveyance deed had already been executed and expressly recorded that physical possession had been delivered to and accepted by her.
The dispute also required the Authority to examine whether the complainant could treat the possession as incomplete or invalid for the purpose of claiming delayed possession interest on the facts and documents placed on record.
Findings and Reasoning of the Authority
After considering the complaint, reply, rejoinder, documents and oral submissions, the Authority focused on the conveyance deed dated 15 June 2021.
1. Conveyance deed recorded delivery and acceptance of physical possession
The Authority noted that the complainant had purchased the plot under the allotment letter dated 6 September 2019 and the agreement dated 20 September 2019.
It further noted that the conveyance deed was executed on 15 June 2021 and that Clause 3 specifically recorded that physical possession had been handed over to and accepted by the complainant.
This documentary acknowledgement was central to the Authority’s decision.
2. Absence of an Occupation or Completion Certificate
The complainant’s case was that possession could not be treated as lawful in the absence of the requisite Occupation Certificate or Completion Certificate.
The Authority observed that it is always advisable for an allottee to take possession of a plot or unit only after the promoter has obtained all necessary clearances from the competent authorities, including the Occupation Certificate/Completion Certificate.
However, while considering the facts of this particular complaint, the Authority found that the promoter had executed the conveyance deed and that the deed specifically recorded delivery and acceptance of physical possession.
It therefore concluded that there was no doubt about the genuineness of possession on the documentary record before it.
Importantly, the decision was based on the facts and documents of this case; it should not be read as a general declaration that an Occupation Certificate or Completion Certificate is unnecessary for lawful possession in every real estate project.
3. No entitlement to interest under Section 18 on the facts of the case
The Authority considered the complainant’s reliance on judicial decisions concerning claims for delayed possession and compensation.
It observed that those decisions could permit an allottee to pursue interest where possession had not been delivered within the stipulated period, or to claim compensation in appropriate circumstances.
However, the Authority distinguished the present case on its facts. Since the conveyance deed had been executed and expressly acknowledged delivery and acceptance of physical possession, it held that there was no delay in giving possession for the purpose of the claim before it.
Accordingly, the Authority concluded that interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act did not arise in the present matter.
4. Distinction between delayed possession interest and compensation for deficiency in service
Although the complaint seeking delayed possession interest was dismissed, the Authority did not foreclose every possible remedy available to the complainant.
In paragraph 5.3 of the order, it expressly granted liberty to the complainant to claim compensation from the competent authority for any deficiency in the services of the builder/promoter, if she considered it appropriate.
Thus, the dismissal of the Section 18 claim did not amount to a categorical finding that no other remedy could be pursued.
Final Decision
Punjab RERA found no merit in the complaint and disposed of it.
The Authority held that:
- The conveyance deed had been executed on 15 June 2021.
- The deed specifically recorded that physical possession had been delivered to and accepted by the complainant.
- On the facts of the case, there was no delay in giving possession for the purpose of the claim under Section 18.
- Interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act did not arise.
- The complainant was at liberty to claim compensation before the competent authority for any deficiency in the services of the builder/promoter, if she deemed it appropriate.
The complaint was accordingly disposed of, with no order as to costs.
Legal Significance of the Decision
This order is relevant for both homebuyers and real estate promoters because it highlights the importance of the documents executed at the time of possession.
1. Acknowledgement of possession in the conveyance deed can be significant
Where a conveyance deed expressly records delivery and acceptance of physical possession, the document may become a crucial factor in deciding a subsequent claim for delayed possession interest.
Allottees should carefully examine the terms of possession documents before signing them.
2. Execution of a conveyance deed does not automatically extinguish every statutory claim
The complainant relied upon the Supreme Court’s decision in Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan & Aleya Sultan v. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. to argue that execution of a conveyance deed does not necessarily bar compensation claims.
The present order should therefore be understood in its factual context. The Authority did not lay down that every claim for compensation or deficiency in service necessarily ends upon execution of a conveyance deed.
3. Delayed possession interest and deficiency-in-service compensation are distinct remedies
The Authority’s decision to preserve the complainant’s liberty to pursue compensation for deficiency in services is significant.
A claim for interest under Section 18 and a claim for compensation arising from deficiency in service may involve different factual and legal considerations. The dismissal of one claim does not necessarily decide the other.
4. Allottees should verify statutory approvals before accepting possession
The Authority expressly observed that it is advisable to take possession only after the promoter has obtained the requisite clearances, including the Occupation Certificate/Completion Certificate.
This is an important practical consideration for prospective homebuyers.
Practical Lessons for Homebuyers
Before accepting possession or executing a conveyance deed, an allottee should:
- Verify whether the promoter has obtained the applicable Occupation Certificate or Completion Certificate.
- Check whether the project has received all necessary approvals from the competent authorities.
- Physically inspect the plot or unit and verify the status of basic amenities.
- Carefully read the possession clause in the conveyance deed.
- Avoid signing a document acknowledging possession if actual possession has not been delivered.
- Preserve the allotment letter, Builder-Buyer Agreement, payment receipts, correspondence and possession documents.
- Seek appropriate legal advice before accepting possession where statutory approvals or promised facilities remain outstanding.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q1. Can an allottee claim delayed possession interest under Section 18 of the RERA Act after executing a conveyance deed?
The answer depends on the facts and documents of the case. In Urmila Arya v. Phenomenal Construction Private Limited, Punjab RERA rejected the claim because the conveyance deed expressly recorded delivery and acceptance of physical possession. The Authority found no delay in possession on the facts before it.
Q2. Does execution of a conveyance deed automatically waive all claims against a builder?
No such universal proposition was laid down in this order. The Authority’s decision concerned the particular claim for delayed possession interest. It expressly preserved the complainant’s liberty to seek compensation for deficiency in the promoter’s services before the competent authority.
Q3. Is an Occupation Certificate or Completion Certificate important before taking possession?
Yes. The Authority observed that it is advisable for an allottee to take possession only after the promoter has obtained the necessary clearances, including the Occupation Certificate/Completion Certificate.
Q4. What was the main reason for dismissal of the complaint in this case?
The main reason was the conveyance deed dated 15 June 2021, particularly Clause 3, which recorded that physical possession had been delivered to and accepted by the complainant. On this basis, the Authority held that interest under Section 18 did not arise.
Q5. Could the complainant still claim compensation for deficiency in service?
Yes. The Authority expressly granted liberty to the complainant to claim compensation from the competent authority for any deficiency in the services of the builder/promoter, if she deemed it appropriate.
- Track Case Status. Use the RERA Punjab eCourt Case Status Search to search by respondent name (“Phenomenal Construction” or “Suraksha Enclave”) or complaint number. [1, 2]
- Verify Project Details. Check quarterly progress updates, extensions, and completion certificates on the RERA Punjab Registered Projects Lookup using registration number PBRERA-SAS79-PR0489
Conclusion
The decision in Urmila Arya v. Phenomenal Construction Private Limited and Another highlights the evidentiary importance of a conveyance deed that expressly acknowledges delivery and acceptance of physical possession.
Punjab RERA dismissed the claim for delayed possession interest under Section 18 because, on the documentary record before it, possession had been delivered and accepted through the conveyance deed. At the same time, the Authority preserved the complainant’s liberty to pursue a separate claim for compensation in respect of any deficiency in the promoter’s services.
For homebuyers, the key takeaway is to verify statutory approvals and the actual status of possession before signing a conveyance deed or possession document. For promoters, the decision underscores the importance of maintaining clear and accurate records of allotment, possession and conveyance.
Case Reference: Urmila Arya v. Phenomenal Construction Private Limited and Another, Complaint No. GC No. 0358 of 2025, Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority, order dated 23 October 2026.
Disclaimer: This article is intended for general legal information and educational purposes only. It is based on the order referred to above and should not be treated as legal advice. The outcome of any other matter will depend on its facts, documents and applicable law.
More on 99888-17966
