M/s Mudra Finance Ltd. vs. Anuj Chauhan: Upholding Rights of Homebuyers for Delayed Possession

In a recent case heard by the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, M/s Mudra Finance Ltd. appealed against an order issued by the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA). The case involved a dispute between M/s Mudra Finance Ltd., a real estate promoter, and Mr. Anuj Chauhan, an allottee. The issue at hand was the delayed possession of a residential unit in the "Vipul Gardens" project located in Dharuhera, Rewari, Haryana.

Case Details:

• Case Number: Appeal No. 51 of 2023
• Date of Decision: 15th May 2023
• Appellants: M/s Mudra Finance Ltd.
• Registered Office: G-12/A, First Floor, Hauz Khas, New Delhi-110016
• Respondents:

1. Anuj Chauhan, C/o Nagendra Chauhan, Vill-Ruhakli, Haridwar (Uttrakhand)-251327
2. Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Panchkula, Mini Secretariat, New Office Block, 2nd and 3rd Floor, Sector-1, Panchkula-134114

Background:

Mr. Anuj Chauhan had booked a flat/unit (403) in Tower 11 of the Vipul Gardens project, with an agreed possession date in July 2019. He had paid a booking amount of Rs. 3,40,000 and a total sale consideration of Rs. 13,07,008. However, the possession of the unit was delayed, and Mr. Chauhan approached the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority seeking a refund along with interest for the delayed possession.

HRERA Order: The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, after hearing both parties, passed an order on 7th July 2022, directing the appellant to refund the total amount paid by the respondent, along with interest calculated at the rate of SBI MCLR+2% (9.70%). The total refund amount was determined to be Rs. 17,61,798.

Appeal and Arguments:

Displeased with the HRERA's order, M/s Mudra Finance Ltd. filed an appeal before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. The appellant argued that the project was complete, and an application for an Occupation Certificate for Tower 11, where Mr. Chauhan's unit was located, had been submitted on 26th June 2019. The appellant contended that since the unit was complete, the refund granted by HRERA was incorrect.

Decision and Rationale:

The Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal carefully considered the arguments put forth by both parties. They noted that while the project's other blocks had received Occupation Certificates in 2014, Tower 11's certificate was still pending. The delay in completing the unit and obtaining the Occupation Certificate was attributed to the appellant's actions, without any valid reasons provided. Consequently, the tribunal found that Mr. Chauhan was entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with interest, as awarded by HRERA.

Conclusion:

In the case of M/s Mudra Finance Ltd. vs. Anuj Chauhan, the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal upheld the HRERA's order, affirming the allottee's right to a refund with interest. The delay in possession and the failure to complete the unit by the agreed date were deemed the promoter's responsibility. This ruling highlights the importance of timely possession and protects the rights of homebuyers in the real estate sector.

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. 51 OF 2023 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.