] somo Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Regional Office, Gautam Buddha Nagar. Hearing Bench-04ए Shri Balvinder Kumar, Member Complaint Number-4204929454 Mili TRA Versus M/s Ajapa Parishad Sahkari Awas Samiti Limited The present complaint application has been requested by the complainant against the opposite party for getting possession and the amount for delayed period. In brief, the complainant's statement is that a flat Wo-A-002 was booked by the complainant in the opposite party's project Dronagiri ¥, for which payment of 56,03,47/- rupees was made by the complainant from time to time on an instalment basis. Possession of the unit was to be given to the complainant by the opposite party by 4.07.2045, but the opposite party failed to give possession to the complainant within the period stipulated in the agreement. The complainant also says that in the agreement the date of possession is given as t50720i5. The final date of possession is 25.07.20I5. On date 0502206, it was informed by them by issuing a letter that construction work has resumed. Therefore, the complainant has requested for possession and the amount for the delayed period to be Rad. In addition to this, | filing a written complaint letter dated 05.t0.2020, it has been stated by the complainant | that GT be made to get them possession of the plot as soon as possible. In support of their statement, photocopies of allotment letter, receipts of deposited amount, account statement etc. were filed by the complainant. Filing a written statement on behalf of the opposite party, it has been stated that in the first phase, possession of t34 units was given by the society to its members in the year 2006. In the second phase, construction of 224 units was carried out. After receiving permission from the Awas Evam Vikas Parishad, the agreement for construction was entered into with M/s Ekdant

2 Buildtech Pra.Li. on date 20.0.2042. According to paragraph-4 of the agreement, only members will be eligible to get flats. The society has no relation with the unit from allotment, agreement, receipts, those records are forged (arses), are not issued by the society and is a conspiracy against the society. It has also been stated that this fraud appears to have been committed jointly by M/s Ekdant Resta and the complainant. Surrender of works was done by M/s Ekdant Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. on date 30.04.20i7. After the meeting, the termination letter of the agreement was got signed on date 24.02.9047. The complainant is not a member of the society and no amount has been given by the complainant to Ajapa Dronagiri. In support of its statement, a photocopy of settlement agreement dated 20.0.2042 has been filed by the opposite party. Both parties were heard and the file was perused. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :- . Is the complainant an allottee in the project of the opposite party? 2. Should possession and interest for the delayed period be provided to the complainant? If yes, what will be the rate of interest? Disposal of Issue Wea

The opposite party says that the agreement, receipts, letters filed by the complainant in respect of Unit WeM-A-002 have been fabricated and submitted. A copy of the allotment letter is available on record, on which Ajapa Parishad Sahkari Awas Samiti has signed and also affixed stamp, and there are signatures of the complainant as well, from which it is clear that this allotment letter was issued by the opposite party Ajapa Parishad Sahkari Awas Samiti and the terms of the agreement made through the allotment letter have been ered. The opposite party, by issuing a letter dated 05.02.2076 to the complainant as well, stated for payment of the remaining amount. The said demand letter has also been signed by the opposite party, from which it is clear that the complainant Mili wel is an allottee in the opposite party's project Dronagiri. From the evidence available on the file it is evident that no document has been fabricated ; In such a situation, this argument of the opposite party is devoid of force that the complainant is not their allottee. Accordingly, point dear Peake is disposed of.

3 Disposal of Issue Number-2 A copy of the agreement is filed on the file, on which it has been signed by Ajapa Parishad Society and their stamp is also affixed, from which it is known that the said allotment letter was issued by the opposite party. Vat allotment letter has been signed by both parties and it is also clear that terms of aged were acceptable to them. In relation to giving possession in the agreement, on page teu in the mea of possession, there is mention of giving possession by date 507205. In such circumstances, as stated above, the complainant was entitled to get possession by date 25.07.205 oT . In such situation, it appears justified to award delayed period interest to the complainant for the period from date t6.07.20I5 till OC / CC or the date of offer of possession, whichever is later. In this regard, it is noteworthy that in the petition of Maharashtra High Court, Neelkamal Realtors ward Pvt. Ltd. etc. Versus Union of India, it has been held by the Hon'ble High Court that :- Section 8(I)(b) lays down that if the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an aprtment due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registration under the Act or for any other reason, he is liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice in this behalf including compensation. If the allottee does not intent to withdraw from the project he shall be paid by the promoter interest for every month's delay till handing over of the possession,. The requirement to pay interest is not a penalty as the payment of interest is compensatory in nature in the light of the delay suffered by the allottee who has paid for his apartment but has not received possession of it. The obligation imposed on the promoter to pay interest till such time as the apartment is handed over to him is not unreasonable. Therefore, in light of the above judgment, it is clear that under the provisions of U.P. RERA, interest will be payable on delay and the principal amount in accordance with the agreement entered into between the promoter and buyer, because the said amount was utilized by the promoters. dl

4 It is also noteworthy that an agreement is executed between the parties, which is signed by both parties, from which it can be determined that the terms of the said agreement are acceptable to both parties. According to paragraph-4 of possession of the agreement, for delay happening in the project, there is provision of amount at the rate of 5//- rupees per sq. ft. per month, according to which the complainant is entitled to receive the amount; according to the provisions of RERA, there is provision to give amount at the same rate at which amount was received by the opposite party. In this regard, it is noteworthy that it has also been held by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the above legal precedent that :- "For the reasons already indicated, aforesaid decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case. I have already indicated that the provisions of RERA are prospective in nature. The penalty under Sections 8, 38, 59, 60, 64, 63 and 64 is to be levied on account of contravention of provisions of RERA, prospectively and not retrospectively" Therefore, in light of the above judgment, it is clear that penalty provided under the provisions of woo RERA should not be retrospective, but prospective. In such situation, prior to RERA coming into effect (date 07.05.20:68), payment of amount should be made according to the agreement, and after RERA came, from date 07.05.2076, according to the provisions of RERA, [the complainant] is entitled to receive interest on the deposited amount for the delayed period; in the suit where no agreement is executed between the parties, there the complainant will be entitled to receive interest on the deposited amount in accordance with the provisions of RERA. As far as the question of payable interest rate is concerned, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) (Agreement for ea / Tee) Rules 2048 have been notified by the State Government under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 206 on date 27.40.2078. In paragraph 9 of the draft of sale / lease deed given as an annexure therein, Events of default of promoters are defined, in which in paragraph 9.26) it is provided for the allottee in the event of default by the promoter that:- The Allottee shall have the option of terminating the Agreement in which case the Promoter shall be liable to refund the entire money paid by the Allottee under any head whatsoever towards the purchase of the apartment, along with interest at the rate equal fv

5 to MCLR (Marginal Cost of Lending Rate) on home loan of State Bank of India +% unless provided otherwise under the Rules. within forty-five days of receiving the termination notice: The same rate is prescribed in paragraph 9.30) even in the event of default by allottees. Keeping the said provision in view, it appears justified to provide interest for the delayed period to the allottee at the interest rate of ४टा+ percent. It is also clarified that if there is any delay in payment of amount due from the complainant, the opposite party can also receive interest only at the rate of MCLRHL percent. As far as the question of up to what period interest should be provided. In this regard, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal Wo 6649-50 ,/2048 Supertech Limited Versus Rajni Goyal that :- " the period of Interest should close on April 206 when the Full Occupancy Certificate was obtained as per the admission of the Respondent — Purchaser herself in Para 4(j) of the Consumer Complaint, wherein she has admitted that the Appellant —Builder had obtained the Completion Certificate as late as April 20l6. The Respondent — Purchaser could not have any further grievance after April 206 with respect to delay in handing over possession. The Respondent — Purchaser ought not to be allowed to reap the benefits of her own delay in taking possession. " According to the above legal precedent, the complainant will be entitled to receive delayed interest up to the receipt of OC / CC or offer of possession, whichever is later. In such circumstances, the complainant will be entitled to receive interest for the period up to OC // CC or offer of possession, whichever is later. In addition to this, on date 7.0208 by notification number-4740 /8-3-78-65 Vividh /46 of U.P. Government Housing and Urban Planning Section-3, the following was mentioned regarding Force Majeure in paragraph-7 of the Model Agreement :- 7, POSSESSION OF THE APARTMENT/PLOT: "१,] Schedule for possession of the said [Apartment/Plot] - The Promoter agrees and understands that timely delivery dl

6 of possession of the [Apartment/Plot] to the Allottee and the Common Areas to the association of Allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, is the essence of the Agreement. The Promoter assures to hand over possession of the [Apartment/Plot] along with ready and complete Common Areas with all specifications, amenities and facilities of the Project in place on | 5 unless there is delay or failure due to war, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or any other calamity caused by nature affecting the regular development of the real estate project ("Force Majeure"). If, however, the completion of the Project is delayed due to the Force Majeure conditions then the Allottee agrees that the Promoter shall be entitled to the extension of time for delivery of possession of the [Apartment/Plot]:" In this sequence, after all relevant facts, on date 20.05.2020, due to the effect of aifas—i9 (Corona Virus Disease), a period of 6 months from date 25.03.2020, i.e., up to date 25.09.2020 has been given by Boro RERA Authority for completion of all projects, and this period will be treated as the period of Force Majeure. Keeping this in view, for the delay occurring in the project from date 25.03.2020 to date 25.09.2020, no interest will be paid by the promoter to the allottees, nor will any delayed interest be charged from the complainant. Tega Issue No.-2 is disposed of. Disposing of the above issues, the following orders are passed. Order

4. The opposite party is ordered to ensure handing over possession by date 30.09.2020 after getting all amenities of the complainant's flat completed in accordance with the agreement, and execute registration as per rules after receiving the payable stamp duty. 2... The opposite party ensure to pay interest to the complainant at the rate of 5/- rupees per square foot per month from date t6.07.20i5 to date 30.04.206 and from date 04.05.2046 till OC / MA. or the date of offer of possession, whichever is later, as delayed interest at the rate of MCLR+I percent. This amount of interest will be adjusted in the final payment amount. In case the amount of interest is in excess of the payable हरी 7 it will be refunded to the complainant. Keeping in view the Force Majeure period, calculation of interest shall not be done for the delay occurring in the project from date 25.03.2020 to date 25.09.2020. 3. The opposite party is also directed that according to Section-2(2४)0) of the RERA Act, 20:6, if after the implementation of RERA any interest rate is charged by the promoter on default by allottee, interest at the same rate will also be paid to the allottee upon default committed by the promoter. 4. Violation of this order will be punishable under Section-63 and other relevant provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2046. The order be uploaded on the portal. Date ०9 / 06/2020 (Member) U.P. Real Estate Regulatory Authority * * *

somo भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, गौतमबुद्धनगर। सुनवाई पीठ-04ए श्री बलविन्दर कुमार, सदस्य शिकायत संख्या--4204929454 मिली TRAY बनाम मैसर्स अजपा परिषद सहकारी आवास समिति लिमिटेड प्रस्तुत शिकायत प्रार्थनापत्र शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा विपक्षी के विरूद्ध कब्जा एवं विलम्बित अवधि की धनराशि दिलाये जाने हेतु अनुरोध किया गया है। संक्षेप में शिकायतकर्ता का कथन है कि शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा विपक्षी की परियोजना ०78९7 में एक फ्लैट Wo-A-002 बुक किया गया, जिसके लिए शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा समय-समय पर किश्तों के आधार पर 56,03,47/- रूपये का भुगतान किया गया। विपक्षी द्वारा शिकायतकर्ता को यूनिट का कब्जा 4.07.2045 तक दिया जाना था, किन्तु विपक्षी द्वारा अनुबन्ध में निर्धारित अवधि में शिकायतकर्ता को कब्जा देने में असमर्थ रहा। शिकायतकर्ता का यह भी कहना है कि अनुबच्ध में कब्जे की तिथि t50720i5 दी गयी है। अन्तिम कब्जे की तिथि 25.07.20I5 है। दिनांक 05.02.206 को उनके द्वारा पत्र जारी करते हुए सूचित किया गया था कि निर्माण कार्य पुर्नसंचालित हो गये है। अतः शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा कब्जा एवं विलम्बित अवधि की धनराशि Rad जाने का अनुरोध किया गया है। इसके अतिरिक्त शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा लिखित शिकायत पत्र दिनांक 05.0.2020 दाखिल करते हुए कहा गया है कि उन्हें प्लॉट का कब्जा जल्द से जल्द दिलाने की कृपा की जाये। शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा अपने कथन के समर्थन में आवंटन पत्र, जमा धनराशि की रसीदें, खाता विवरण आदि की छायाप्रतियां दाखिल की गयीं |

विपक्षी की ओर से प्रतिवादपत्र दाखिल करते हुए कथन किया गया है कि सोसाइटी द्वारा प्रथम चरण में t34 यूनिटस्‌ अपने सदस्यों को वर्ष 2006 में कब्जा दे दिया गया था। द्वितीय चरण में 224 यूनिटस्‌ का निर्माण कराया गया। आवास एवं विकास परिषद से अनुमति मिलने के बाद निर्माण हेतु अनुबन्ध मैसर्स एकदंत dd 2 बिल्डटेक प्राणलि0 से दिनांक 20.0.2042 को किया गया। अनुबन्ध के प्रस्तर-4 के अनुसार केवल सदस्य ही फ्लैट पाने के लिए पात्र होगें। आवंटन, अनुबन्ध, रसीदें से यूनिट से सोसाइटी का कोई सम्बन्ध नहीं है, वे अभिलेख जाली (arses) हैं, सोसाइटी द्वारा जारी नहीं है तथा सोसाइटी के विरूद्ध षणयंत्र है। यह भी कहा है कि यह जालसाजी मैसर्स एकदन्त Resta व शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा मिलकर की गयी प्रतीत होती है। मैसर्स wea बिल्डटेक प्रा0लि0 द्वारा कार्यों को समर्पण दिनांक 30.04. 20i7 को किया गया। मीटिंग के उपरान्त अनुबन्ध की समाप्ति पत्र दिनांक 24.02. 20i7 को हस्ताक्षरित कराया गया। शिकायतकर्ता सोसाइटी का सदस्य नहीं है और शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा अजपा द्रोणागिरी को कोई धनराशि नहीं दी गयी है। विपक्षी द्वारा अपने कथन के समर्थन में समझौता अनुबन्ध दिनांक 20.0.2042 की छायाप्रति दाखिल की गयी है। उभयपक्ष को सुना व पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया। पक्षकारों के अभिवचनों के आधार पर निम्नलिखित वाद बिन्दु विचरित किये गये :- 4... क्‍या शिकायतकर्ता, विपक्षी की परियोजना में आवंटी हैं ? 2. क्या शिकायतकर्ता को कब्जा एवं विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज दिलाया जाये? यदि हाँ तो ब्याज का दर क्‍या होगा ? निस्तारण बिन्दु Wea

विपक्षी का कहना है कि शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा यूनिट WeT-A-002 के सापेक्ष दाखिल किये गये अनुबन्ध, रसीदें, पत्र कूटरचित कर प्रस्तुत किये गये है। पत्रावली पर आवंटन पत्र की प्रति उपलब्ध है, जिस पर अजपा परिषद सहकारी आवास समिति द्वारा हस्ताक्षर करते हुए मोहर भी लगायी गयी है और शिकायतकर्ता के भी हस्ताक्षर हैं, जिससे यह स्पष्ट है कि यह आवंटन पत्र विपक्षी अजपा परिषद सहकारी आवास समिति द्वारा जारी किया गया और आवंटन पत्र द्वारा किये गये अनुबन्ध की शर्तों को Sere किया गया है। विपक्षी द्वारा शिकायगरकर्ता को दिनांक 05.02.2076 को भी पत्र जारी करते हुए शेष धनराशि का भुगतान किये जाने कथन किया गया। उक्त मांग पत्र पर भी विपक्षी द्वारा हस्ताक्षर किये गये है, जिससे यह स्पष्ट है कि शिकायतकर्ता मिली बस्सी विपक्षी की परियोजना Dronagiri में आवंटी है। पत्रावली पर उपलब्ध साक्ष्यों से यह विदित है कि किसी भी दस्तावेज की कूटरचना नहीं की गयी है। ऐसे में विपक्षी का यह तर्क sedis है कि शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा उनके आवंटी नहीं है। तद्नुसार बिन्दु dea Peake किया जाता है। निस्तारण बिन्दु संख्या-2 पत्रावली पर अनुबन्ध की प्रति दाखिल है, जिसपर अजपा परिषद सोसाइटी द्वारा हस्ताक्षरित किये गये है और उनके मोहर भी लगे है, जिससे विदित है कि उक्त आवंटन पत्र विपक्षी द्वारा जारी किया गया। उक्त आवंटन पत्र उभय पक्षों द्वारा हस्ताक्षरित किया गया है और यह भी स्पष्ट है कि aged की शर्तें oe स्वीकार्य थी। अनुबन्ध में कब्जा दिये जाने के सम्बन्ध में पृष्ठ ter पर कब्जे वाले प्रस्तर-4 में दिनांक 4507205 तक कब्जा दिये जाने का उल्लेख है। ऐसे में उक्तानुसार शिकायतकर्ता द्वारा दिनांक 25.07.205 तक कब्जा पाने का अधिकारी था।

ऐसी दशा में शिकायतकर्ता को दिनांक t6.07.20i5 से ओ.सी /सी.सी अथवा कब्जा ऑफर किये जाने की तिथि, जो भी बाद में हो तक की अवधि पर विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज दिलाया जाना न्यायोचित प्रतीत होता है। इस सम्बन्ध में उल्लेखनीय है कि महाराष्ट्र उच्च न्यायालय के नीलकमल रियलटर्स सबअर्बन प्रालि. आदि बनाम यूनियन ऑफ इंडिया की याचिका में माननीय उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा अभिनिर्धारित किया गया है कि :- Section 8()(0) lays down that if the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an aprtment due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registration under the Act or for any other reason, he is liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice in this behalf including compensation. If the allottee does not intent to withdraw from the project he shall be paid by the promoter interest for every month's delay till handing over of the possession,. The requirement to pay interest is not a penalty as the payment of interest is compensatory in nature in the light of the delay suffered by the allottee who has paid for his apartment but has not received possession of it. The obligation imposed on the promoter to pay interest till such time as the apartment is handed over to him is not unreasonable.

अतः उपरोक्त निर्णय के आलोक में यह स्पष्ट है कि उ0प्र0 रेरा के प्राविधानों के अन्तर्गत प्रमोटर व केता के बीच किये गये अनुबंध के अनुरूप विलम्ब तथा मूल धनराशि पर ब्याज देय होगा, क्‍योंकि प्रमोटर्स द्वारा उक्त धनराशि का उपभोग किया गया है। dl यह भी उल्लेखनीय है कि पक्षकारों के मध्य एक अनुबन्ध निष्पादित है, जो कि उभयपक्ष द्वारा हस्ताक्षरित है, जिससे यह अवधारित किया जा सकता है कि उभयपक्ष को उक्त अनुबन्ध की शर्ते स्वीकार हैं। अनुबन्ध के कब्जे वाले प्रस्तर-4 के अनुसार परियोजना में हो रहे विलम्ब के लिए 5/— रूपये प्रतिवर्ग फुट प्रतिमाह की दर से धनराशि का प्राविधान है, जिसके अनुसार शिकायतकर्ता धनराशि पाने का अधिकारी है, रेरा के प्राविधानों के अनुसार जिस दर से विपक्षी द्वारा धनराशि प्राप्त की गयी है उसी दर से धनराशि देने का प्राविधान है। इस सम्बन्ध में उल्लेखनीय है कि माननीय उच्च न्यायालय मुम्बई द्वारा उपरोक्त विधि व्यवस्था में यह भी अभिनिर्धारित किया गया है कि :- "For the reasons already indicated, aforesaid decisions are not applicable to the facts of the present case. I have already indicated that the provisions of RERA are prospective in nature. The penalty under Sections 8, 38, 59, 60, 6, 63 and 64 is to be levied on account of contravention of provisions of RERA, prospectively

and not retrospectively" अतः उपरोक्त निर्णय के आलोक में यह स्पष्ट है कि उ0प्र0 रेरा के प्राविधानों के अन्तर्गत प्राविधानित दंड पूर्वव्यापी नही, बल्कि भविष्यलक्षी होना चाहिये। ऐसी दशा में रेरा के प्रभाव में (दिनाक 07.05.20:6) से पूर्व अनुबन्ध के अनुसार धनराशि भुगतान किया जाना चाहिये और रेरा के आने के बाद दिनांक 04.05.20:6 से रेरा के प्राविधानो के अनुसार विलंबित अवधि में जमा धनराशि पर ब्याज पाने का अधिकारी है, जिस वाद में पक्षकारों के मध्य कोई अनुबन्ध निष्पादित नही है, वहां शिकायतकर्ता रेरा के प्राविधानों के अनुरूप जमा धनराशि पर ब्याज पाने का अधिकारी होगा। जहाँ तक देय ब्याज दर का प्रश्न है, तो राज्य सरकार द्वारा भू-सम्पदा (विनियमन एवं विकास) अधिनियम 206 के अधीन दिनांक 27.40.2078 को भू-सम्पदा (विनियमन और विकास) (विकय,/पटटा के लिए करार) नियमावली 2048 अधिसूचित की गयी हैं। इसमें संलग्नक के रूप में दिये गये विकय /पटटा विलेख के प्रारूप के प्रस्तर 9 में प्रमोटर्स के डिफाल्ट प्रकरण (Events of default) परिभाषित है, जिसमें प्रस्तर 9.26) में प्रमोटर के डिफाल्टर होने की स्थिति में आवंटी हेतु प्राविधानित है कि:- The Allottee shall have the option of terminating the Agreement in which case the Promoter shall be liable to refund the entire money paid by the Allottee under any head whatsoever towards the purchase of the apartment, along with interest at the rate equal fv to MCLR (Marginal Cost of Lending Rate) on home loan of State Bank of India +% unless provided otherwise under the Rules. within forty-five days of receiving the termination notice:

यही दर आवंटियों के द्वारा डिफॉल्ट की स्थिति में भी प्रस्तर 9.30) में निर्धारित है। उक्त प्राविधान को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए आवंटी को MCLRH प्रतिशत की ब्याज दर पर विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज दिलाया जाना न्यायोचित प्रतीत होता है। यह भी स्पष्ट किया जाता है कि यदि शिकायतकर्ता की कोई देय धनराशि में विलम्ब है, तो विपक्षी भी McLRH प्रतिशत की दर से ही ब्याज प्राप्त सकता है। जहाँ तक किस अवधि तक का ब्याज दिलाये जाने का प्रश्न है। इस सम्बन्ध में सिविल अपील Wo 6649-50 // 2048 सुपरटेक लिमिटेड बनाम रजनी गोयल में माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय द्वारा अभिनिर्धारित किया गया है कि :- " the period of Interest should close on April 206 when the Full Occupancy Certificate was obtained as per the admission of the Respondent — Purchaser herself in Para 4(j) of the Consumer Complaint, wherein she has admitted that the Appellant —Builder had obtained the Completion Certificate as late as April 20l6. The Respondent — Purchaser could not have any further grievance after April 206 with respect to delay in handing over possession. The Respondent — Purchaser ought not to be allowed to reap the benefits of her own delay in taking possession. " उपरोक्त विधि व्यवस्था के अनुसार ओ.सी./सी.सी मिलने अथवा कब्जा ऑफर किये जाने, जो भी बाद में हो तक शिकायतकर्ता विलम्ब ब्याज पाने का अधिकारी होगा। ऐसी दशा में शिकायतकर्ता ओ.सी.//सी.सी अथवा कब्जा ऑफर किये जाने, जो भी बाद में हो तक की अवधि पर ब्याज पाने के अधिकारी होगें।

इसके अतिरिक्त दिनांक 7.0.208 को Soyo शासन आवास एवं शहरी नियोजन अनुभाग-3 की अधिसूचना संख्या-4740 /8-3-78-65 विविध /46 के द्वारा मॉडल एग्रीमेन्ट के प्रस्तर-7 में फोर्स मैज्योर के सम्बन्ध में निम्न उल्लेख किया गया a 7. POSSESSION OF THE APARTMENT/PLOT: "१,] Schedule for possession of the said [Apartment/Plot] - The Promoter agrees and understands that timely delivery dl of possession of the [Apartment/Plot] to the Allottee and the Common Areas to the association of Allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be, is the essence of the Agreement. The Promoter assures to hand over possession of the [Apartment/Plot] along with ready and complete Common Areas with all specifications, amenities and facilities of the Project in place on unless there is delay or failure due to war, flood, drought, fire, cyclone, earthquake or any other calamity caused by nature affecting the regular development of the real estate project ("Force Majeure"). If, however, the completion of the Project is delayed due to the Force Majeure conditions then the Allottee agrees that the Promoter shall be entitled to the extension of time for delivery of possession of the [Apartment/Plot]:"

इसी कम में समस्त सुसंगत तथ्यों के बाद Goro रेरा अथॉरिटी द्वारा दिनांक 20.05. 2020 को कोविड-49 (Corona Virus Disease) के प्रभाव के कारण सभी परियोजनाओं को पूर्ण करने हेतु दिनांक 25.03.2020 से 6 माह की अवधि अर्थात्‌ दिनांक 25.09.2020 तक की अवधि दे दी गयी है और यह अवधि फोर्स मैज्योर की अवधि मानी जायेगी। इसको दृष्टिगत रखते हुए दिनांक 25.03.2020 से दिनांक 25. 09.2020 तक परियोजना में हुए विलम्ब हेतु कोई ब्याज प्रोमोटर द्वारा आवंटियों को नहीं दिया जाएगा और न ही शिकायतकर्ता से कोई विलम्ब ब्याज लिया जायेगा। Tegan बिन्दु सं०-2 निस्तारित किया जाता है। उपरोक्त बिन्दुओं का निस्तारण करते हुए निम्न आदेश पारित किये जाते है। आदेश 4. faueft को आदेशित किया जाता है कि वह शिकायतकर्ता के फ्लैट की समस्त सुविधाओं को अनुबन्ध के अनुसार पूर्ण कराकर दिनांक 30.09.2020 तक कब्जा देना सुनिश्चित करें और देय स्टाम्प शुल्क प्राप्त कर नियमानुसार रजिस्ट्री कराये। 2... विपक्षी, शिकायतकर्ता को दिनांक 46.07.20i5 से दिनांक 30.04.20I6 तक 5/- रूपये प्रति वर्ग फुट प्रतिमाह की दर से व दिनांक 0.05.206 ओ.सी. / सी.सी. अथवा कब्जा ऑफर किये जाने की तिथि, जो भी बाद में हो तक की अवधि पर विलम्ब ब्याज के रूप में MCLR+I प्रतिशत की दर से ब्याज अदा करना सुनिश्चित करें| ब्याज की यह धनराशि अंतिम भुगतान की धनराशि में समायोजित की जायेगी। ब्याज की धनराशि देय री 7 अधिक होने पर शिकायतकर्ता को वापस की जायेगी। फोर्स मैज्योर पीरियड को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए दिनांक 25.03.2020 से दिनांक 25.09.2020 तक परियोजना में हुए विलम्ब हेतु ब्याज की गणना नहीं की जायेगी।

3, विपक्षी को यह भी निर्देशित किया जाता है कि रेरा अधिनियम, 2076 की धारा-2(2४)0) के अनुसार यदि रेरा लागू होने के बाद कोई ब्याज दर आवंटी के डिफॉल्ट से प्रोमोटर द्वारा लिया जाता है, तो उसी दर से ब्याज प्रोमोटर द्वारा डिफॉल्ट किये जाने पर भी आवंटी को दिया जायेगा। 4. इस आदेश का उल्लघंन भू-सम्पदा (विनियमन तथा विकास) अधिनियम, 20i6 की धारा-63 तथा अन्य सुसंगत प्राविधानों के अन्तर्गत दंडनीय होगा। आदेश पोर्टल पर अपलोड किया जाये। dakee (सदस्य) उ0प्र0 भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण दिनांक29 / 06/2020