Latest news with #HaryanaRealEstateRegulatoryAuthority
Time of India
3 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Flat delayed, builder told to pay buyer 11% interest in Gurgaon
Gurgaon: Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRera) has directed the builder of a highrise condominium — an affordable group housing project in Sector 109 — to pay the delay-possession interest and hand over the apartment to the complainant as per the terms of the buyer's agreement. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The unit number 908 of Tower 3 at Expressway Towers 109 was purchased for Rs 26.26 lakh nine years ago. The builder assured timely possession of the flat, with a carpet area of 644 sqft and a balcony area of 100 sqft, but failed to deliver within the stipulated four-year period from the date of allotment — May 19, 2017. HRera (Gurgaon) ordered the realtor to pay interest at 11.10% per annum on the amount paid by the complainant from May 30, 2022 until the valid offer of possession or two months post-occupation certificate — whichever is earlier. The builder has been given 90 days to clear all arrears of interest and must continue paying interest monthly until possession is offered. Additionally, the builder must provide an updated statement of account within 30 days, reflecting adjusted dues after interest. The complainant approached HRera alleging an inordinate delay in the delivery of the unit, which had been booked in 2016. An initial payment of Rs 1.28 lakh was made on Jan 17, 2016 and a total of Rs 13.65 lakh was paid by May 2018. Despite demands raised by the promoter in July 2021 for outstanding dues, the project remained incomplete. The complainant sought immediate possession after adjusting pending dues against delay compensation. After hearing the matter, HRera held the promoter in contravention of Section 11(4)(a) of the RERA Act and passed directions under Section 37. Upon receipt of the updated statement of account, the complainant must clear any outstanding dues within 60 days. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The builder has also been instructed to hand over the flat and execute the conveyance deed within three months of obtaining the occupation certificate, subject to stamp duty and registration charges. The authority clarified that the promoter cannot charge labour cess or work contract tax and must provide VAT calculation proofs if applicable. Maintenance charges may only be levied as per actual consumption, the order said. In Aug last year, HRera conducted a meeting on the stalled OSB Expressway Towers project in Sector 109 with homebuyers and the builder and issued a final warning, saying that if the project was not completed within six months, the regulator would invoke Section 8 of the Rera Act. This would transfer control to the buyers' association and potentially involve a third-party builder. The project, launched in 2017, faced significant delays, and despite repeated warnings, the builder failed to deliver possession of the flats. In response to HRera chairperson Arun Kumar's warning, the builder had assured completion of the project within the timeframe. However, he faces challenges arising out of licence suspension of three of his other projects due to default in payment and non-compliance with department of town and country planning orders.
Time of India
29-04-2025
- Business
- Time of India
HC quashes Haryana governmmet's order to grant RERA recovery powers
GURUGRAM: The Punjab and Haryana high court has quashed Haryana govt's notification granting collector-like powers to officials of the real estate regulator for recovering dues. The HC, on Thursday (April 24), ruled that Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (H-Rera) officials can only conduct inquiries and determine compensation but cannot directly enforce recovery themselves. Granting recovery powers to Rera officers, the court said, was a "violation of the legal framework" set under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA), 2016. The state govt, under chief minister Nayab Saini, had issued a notification on May 11, 2024 empowering Rera officers to recover interest, penalties and compensation amounts directly. The HC also advised the state govt to amend the relevant rules and appoint appropriate revenue officers for recovery, in accordance with the established legal framework. Following the court's verdict, the Haryana govt will now have to redesign its recovery mechanism and Rera will need to adjust its functioning accordingly. The division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice HS Grewal, while hearing the matter, said the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (Rera), 2016 clearly defines the roles of different authorities. The govt's move had been justified by the state citing five potential advantages. However, a real estate firm challenged the notification in the court in June 2024, arguing that under Rera, any outstanding amount should be recovered as arrears of land revenue and not directly by Rera officials. Accepting the petitioner's arguments, the HC annulled the govt's notification and held that Rera officials' role is "limited to adjudication and assessment of dues". Enforcement of such dues must strictly follow the procedure under the Haryana Land Revenue Act , 1887 and should not be treated as equivalent to enforcing court orders. The court rejected the state's argument that powers under Section 27 of the Haryana Land Revenue Act could justify its decision. The bench underlined that making rules and adjudicating matters are two separate functions and must remain distinct. The court also criticised an earlier single-bench judgment that allowed Rera orders to be executed like civil court decrees. The court made two key observations: first, that Rera officials are limited to inquiry and determination of compensation, and second, the recovery process must align with the legal framework, requiring necessary amendments and the appointment of proper authorities.
Time of India
28-04-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Punjab and Haryana high court quashes Haryana govt's order to grant Rera recovery powers
Gurgaon: The Punjab and Haryana high court has quashed Haryana govt's notification granting collector-like powers to officials of the real estate regulator for recovering dues. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The HC, on Thursday (April 24), ruled that Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (H-Rera) officials can only conduct inquiries and determine compensation but cannot directly enforce recovery themselves. Granting recovery powers to Rera officers, the court said, was a "violation of the legal framework" set under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA), 2016. The state govt, under chief minister Nayab Saini, had issued a notification on May 11, 2024 empowering Rera officers to recover interest, penalties and compensation amounts directly. The HC also advised the state govt to amend the relevant rules and appoint appropriate revenue officers for recovery, in accordance with the established legal framework. Following the court's verdict, the Haryana govt will now have to redesign its recovery mechanism and Rera will need to adjust its functioning accordingly. The division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice HS Grewal, while hearing the matter, said the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (Rera), 2016 clearly defines the roles of different authorities. The govt's move had been justified by the state citing five potential advantages. However, a real estate firm challenged the notification in the court in June 2024, arguing that under Rera, any outstanding amount should be recovered as arrears of land revenue and not directly by Rera officials. Accepting the petitioner's arguments, the HC annulled the govt's notification and held that Rera officials' role is "limited to adjudication and assessment of dues". Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Enforcement of such dues must strictly follow the procedure under the Haryana Land Revenue Act , 1887 and should not be treated as equivalent to enforcing court orders. The court rejected the state's argument that powers under Section 27 of the Haryana Land Revenue Act could justify its decision. The bench underlined that making rules and adjudicating matters are two separate functions and must remain distinct. The court also criticised an earlier single-bench judgment that allowed Rera orders to be executed like civil court decrees. The court made two key observations: first, that Rera officials are limited to inquiry and determination of compensation, and second, the recovery process must align with the legal framework, requiring necessary amendments and the appointment of proper authorities.
