Affordable Housing Policy Dispute: Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal Rules in Favor of Vaibhav Kumar Bansal against Agrante Realty Limited

In a recent case before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Appeal No. 464 of 2022, an important decision was made regarding a dispute between Vaibhav Kumar Bansal and Agrante Realty Limited. The case involved an application for allotment of a flat under the Affordable Housing Policy of the State of Haryana. This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the case, highlighting the facts, arguments, and the tribunal's final decision.

Case Background:

Vaibhav Kumar Bansal, an applicant, had applied for the allotment of a flat under the Affordable Housing Policy. However, before the draw of lots could take place, Bansal decided to surrender his unit and withdraw from the project. Consequently, he filed a complaint before the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority on June 14, 2019. Subsequently, the draw of lots was held on June 24, 2019, in which Bansal was successful.

The Impugned Order:

The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, in its order dated May 10, 2022, concluded that Bansal was not entitled to any interest as per the Affordable Housing Policy. However, the authority allowed Bansal to approach the Adjudicating Officer and file a separate complaint under relevant sections of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, for claiming compensation.

Appeal and Final Decision:

Aggrieved by the order of the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Bansal filed an appeal before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. The tribunal, consisting of Justice Rajan Gupta (Chairman), Shri Inderjeet Mehta (Member - Judicial), and Shri Anil Kumar Gupta (Member - Technical), heard the case and made its decision on May 3, 2023.

The tribunal noted that Bansal had surrendered the unit before the commencement of the project, in accordance with the Affordable Housing Policy. It held that the policy did not provide for the grant of interest in case an allottee decided to withdraw before the draw of lots. However, it ruled that Bansal should have been refunded within 15 days of the allotment, as he had filed the complaint for a refund on June 14, 2019, before the draw of lots on June 24, 2019.

As the respondent, Agrante Realty Limited, had failed to pay the refund amount to Bansal, the tribunal allowed interest on the refund amount at the prescribed rate of 10.07% per annum, effective from July 9, 2019, until realization.

Conclusion:

The case of Vaibhav Kumar Bansal vs. Agrante Realty Limited before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal shed light on the dispute arising from the surrender of a unit under the Affordable Housing Policy. The tribunal upheld Bansal's right to a refund and awarded him interest on the refund amount. This decision serves as an important precedent in ensuring the fair treatment of applicants and allottees under real estate policies.

Note: The information provided in this article about Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal or professional advice and readers should consult qualified professionals for advice specific to their circumstances. The information provided in this article is based on the Appeal No. 464 of 2022 before the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority

We hope you found our blog insightful and engaging! We appreciate your time and interest. If you enjoyed reading it, don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter to receive regular updates on our latest content. Visit our website www.reunionhq.in to know more.