उ0प्र0 भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, गौतमबुद्धनगर। सुनवाई पीठ-3 उपस्थिति :- श्री बलविन्दर कुमार, सदस्य Rx) शिकायत संख्या : 4220:827249 बीरेन्द्र कुमार सिंह, निवासी- सी 4/7, द्वितीय तल रजनी गंधा हाउसिंग सोसायटी वालहिकरावड़ी पुणे Tat बनाम निराला हाउसिंग प्राणलिए पता: 443, 447a फ्लोर कैलाश बिल्डिंग, whe न. 26 eee गांधी मार्ग नई eee प्रतिवादी अधि-निर्णय प्रस्तुत वाद वादी द्वारा प्रतिवादी के विरूद्ध जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या यूनिट का कब्जा मय विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज व प्रतिपूर्ति (Compensation) दिलाये जाने हेतु संस्थित किया गया है। संक्षेप में वादी का कथन है कि प्रतिवादी द्वारा संचालित परियोजना Nirala Aspire Phase | में यूनिट संख्या A3— 804 बुक किया था, जिसके एवज में वादी ने प्रतिवादी को BO 43,04,560/— भुगतान किया था। वादी द्वारा प्रस्तुत लिखित अभिकथन में यह उल्लेख किया गया है कि केता-विकेता अनुबंध पत्र पर दिनांक 34.05.2043 को दोनो पक्षों के मध्य हस्ताक्षर हुआ था, जिसके अनुसार यूनिट का कब्जा जून 20i6 तक प्राप्त होना था। वादी द्वारा यह कथन किया गया है कि प्रतिवादी ने दिनांक 28.06.20i8 को ईमेल के माध्यम से ऑफर ऑफ पजेशन प्रेषित किया *परन्तु वादी द्वारा ऑफर ऑफ पजेशन को लेने से इंकार कर दिया गया जिसके निम्न कारण वादी द्वारा बताये गये है:- 4. प्रतिवादी द्वारा कब्जा दिये जाने में काफी विलम्ब किया गया। 2. प्रतिवादी द्वारा विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज भी नहीं दिया गया। WMA 3. प्रतिवादी द्वारा किचन के ले-ऑउट बदल दिये जाने के सम्बंध में परिवादी से सम्पर्क नहीं किया गया और प्रतिपूर्ति भी नहीं दी गयी। 4. वादी ने लिखित अभिकथन के प्रस्तर संख्या 3 में यह उल्लेख किया है कि

“The complainant was also assured by the representative of the respondent that the difference between the carpet area and super area could not be more than 30 % but at time of the offer of the possession of the flat the loading is more than 65%, Even the respondent itself mentioned the carpet of the flat is 886 square feet upon UPRERA website. The complainant was also assured for the discount of 3% of the basic cost of the flat and same has been informed by the E-mail dated 26-09-202 sent by the respondent to the complainant but later on the respondent has reduced the percentage of the discount from the 30 to 2% without any reason and took the additional amount from the ‘compalinant.” अतः वादी ने जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या यूनिट का कब्जा मय विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज व प्रतिपूर्ति (Compensation) दिलाये जाने हेतु अनुरोध किया है। वादी ने वादपत्र के समर्थन में लिखित अभिकथन, ईमेल संवाद व प्रतिउत्तर की छायाप्रति दाखिल किये है। प्राधिकरण की ओर से प्रतिवादी को नोटिस जारी किये गये और जिसकी तामीला प्रतिवादी पर सम्यक रूप से की गयी। प्रतिवादी अधिवक्ता द्वारा प्रतिवादपत्र प्रस्तुत किया गया। प्रतिवादपत्र के प्रस्तर संख्या 4, 3 व 4 में यह अंकित किया गया है कि “ Para-t: It is pertinent to mention here that respondent has already got the OC for the said tower and registries are already being executed of the respective flat buyers, therefore this Hon'ble forum may direct the complainant to get its sub-lease deed registered instead of indulging in false and frivolous litigations.

Para: It is further specifically wrong and denied that the complainant was also assured by the representative of the respondent that the difference between the carpet area and super area could not be more than 30% but at the yes time of offer of possession of the flat the loading is more than 65%, It is further specifically wrong and denied that even the respondent itself mentioned the carpet area of the flat is 886 sq ft.upon UP RERA Website. . It is further specifically wrong and denied that the complainant was also assured for the discount of 3% of the basic cost of the flat. and same has been informed by the e-mail dated 26,0०9. sent by the respondent to the complainant but later on the respondent has reduced the percentage of discount from 3% to 2% without any reason and took the additional amount from the complainant .On the contrary it is submitted that complainant himself has approached the answering respondent for booking the flat in question and upon his persistent request as he was not the resident of NCR, handsome discount was given to him." Para-4: It is further submitted that the complainant himself admitted that as per the allotment letter /agreement the total cost of the flat isn question is /was रि5.4,62,776 plus service tax as applicable therefore no PLC was mentioned in that and even in the confirmation letter no PLC has been charged extra as alleged by the complainant.

सुना एवं पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया। पत्रावली के अवलोकन से विदित हुआ कि पत्रावली पर अनुबंध पत्र की प्रति उपलब्ध नहीं है। प्रतिवादी हस्ताक्षारित अनुबंध पत्र में अंकित अनुपात के हिसाब से ही एरिया बढ़ा सकता तथा अन्य चार्जेज प्राप्त कर सकता है। उपरोक्त विश्लेषण से स्पष्ट है कि वादी जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या अपनी यूनिट का कब्जा चाहता है और जब तक उसकी यूनिट नही दी जाती है, तब तक उसे विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज दिलाया जाये। इस सम्बंध में उल्लेखनीय है कि :- Under the Act, obligation of promotes has been provided under Sect 44 (4), which reads as: The promoter shall— (a) be responsible for all obligations, > responsibilities and functions under the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulations made there under or to the allottees as per the agreement for sale, or to the association of allottees, as the case may be, till the conveyance of all the apartments, plots or buildings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common areas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be. fla On the other hand, rights and duties of allottee have been clearly provided under the Act. Sub-section 4 of Section 49 Read as under;(4) The allottee shall be entitled to claim the refund of amount paid along with interest at such rate as may be prescribed and compensation in the manner as provided under this Act, from the promoter, if the promoter fails to comply or is unable to give possession of the apartment, plot or building, as the case may be, in accordance with the

+ terms of agreement for sale or due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of his registration under the provisions of this Act or the rules or regulations made there under. Besides, Section 48 (2)/#0५/4०९5 that “If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or building, in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or (b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registration under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act: Provided that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw ‘from the project, he shall be paid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of the possession, at such rate as may be prescribed.

If we read these provisions conjointly, the language of these provisions suggest that if the promoter/developer fails to fulfill his obligations to handover the possession as per terms of the agreement, the allottee is entitled to claim refund. However, different Authorities set up under the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act,2046 across the country are taking a balanced /pragmatic view as far as refund to the allottees of project is concerned when the projects are at a much more advance stage of development. Authorities are considering the situation of allottees of a real estate project as well as status of the project i.e stage of construction , timelines for completion, tentative possible ‘offer date of possession’ from the developer/promoter, possible consensus of the allotee in acceptance of possession within the possible new ‘offer date of possession’ * etc. Section 32 of the RERA Act deals with functions of the Authority for promotion of Real Estate Sector. This Section reads as: The Authority shall in order to facilitate the growth and promotion of a healthy, transparent, efficient and competitive real estate sector make recommendations to the appropriate Government of the competent authority, as the case may be, on,(a) protection of interest of the allottees, promoter and real estate agent;(b).. (%)...........-४०/.. "डॉ... (9)....««««< ४.....ल्‍०6०«* / (i) any other issue that the Authority may think necessary for the promotion of the real estate sector.”

On the other hand, Section 38 of the RERA Act, which deals with powers of the Authority expect the authority/RERA to act on the principle of natural justice. The Section reads as (7) The Authority shall have powers to impose penalty or interest, in regard to any contravention of obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents, under this Act or the rules and the regulations made there under. (2) The Authority shall be guided by the principles _ of natural justice and, subject to the other provisions of this Act and the rules made there under, the Authority shall have powers to regulate its own procedure” This provision confer power to the Authority to impose penalty or interest, in regard to any contravention of obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents for contravention of any provisions of the Act and Rules made there under and it also provides that the Authority shall be guided by the principles of natural justice. If we read these provisions together along with the scheme of the Act, the Authority is created not only to protect interest of the allottee of the real estate project but also to protect the interest of promoters in order to promote a healthy growth of the real estate sector Thus, from the provisions referred above and view taken by the different authorities, it is clear that complainant

_ has right to withdraw from the project if promoter failed to deliver the flat/unit within the time specified in the agreement. However, different real estate regulatory Authorities are deciding matters and awarding refund on the basis of fact of each case considering stage of construction of the project and period and reasons of delay in handing over the possession to homebuyers. In any case, the promoter will be required to pay interest on delayed period till the date of possession. इस सम्बंध में माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय द्वारा सिविल अपील to 744/20:7 चित्रा. शर्मा आदि बनाम यूनियन ऑफ इंडिया आदि में किया गया आब्जरवेशन महत्वपूर्ण है :- " 40. The figures........ which have been made available presently, following the opening of the web portal by the amicus curiae, indicate that 8% of the home buyers have sought a refund of their monies while 92% would evidently prefer possession of the homes which they have purchased. We cannot be unmindful of the interests of 92% of the home buyers many of whom would also have obtained loans to secure a home. They would have a legitimate grievance if the corpus of Rs 750 crores (together with accrued interest) is distributed to the home buyers who seek a refund." इस स्टेज पर रियल एस्टेट सेक्टर की वर्तमान वित्तीय स्थिति को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए धनराशि वापस किये जाने से उन आवंटियों के हित प्रतिकूलत: प्रभावित होने संभावित है, जो कि यूनिट का कब्जा लेना चाहते हैं। ऐसी स्थिति में धनवापसी किया जाना उचित प्रतीत नही होता है

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 अवधि तथा मूल धनराशि पर ब्याज देय होगा, क्योंकि प्रमोटर्स द्वारा उक्त धनराशि का उपभोग किया गया है। अतः वादी को कब्जा व विलम्बित अवधि पर ब्याज कब्जा की तिथि तक दिलाया जाना न्यायोचित प्रतीत होता है। आदेश 4. प्रतिवादी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि occupation. certificate के साथ वादी को नवम्बर 20I9 तक यूनिट का भौतिक कब्जा (physical possession) उपलब्ध कराये। साथ ही शिकायतकर्ता व प्रमोटर के बीच हुये BTR Builders Buyers Agreement (BBA) के अनुसार विलम्बित अवधि / delayed period & सम्बंध में दिनांक 30.04.20:6 तक 88 में उल्लिखित TS/penalty के अनुसार तथा दिनांक 04.05.2046 Real Estate Regulation & Development, Act 2046 के लागू होने की तिथि) से ओससी प्राप्त होने की तिथि तक MCLR + % की दर से प्रमोटर द्वारा दण्ड AT /penal interest अदा किया जाएगा। ब्याज /दण्ड की इस धनराशि को कब्जा दिये जाने के समय अंतिम देय धनराशि में समायोजित की जाएगी। हैं 2. यदि प्रतिवादी वादी को नवम्बर 2049 तक यूनिट का कब्जा उपलब्ध कराने में असफल रहा तो नवम्बर 2049 के उपरांत 45 दिन में वादी द्वारा yor जमा की गयी धनराशि जमा करने की तिथि से भुगतान की तिथि तक मय ब्याज MCLR + % की दर से भुगतान करेगा। ऐसी स्थिति में यदि उक्त धनराशि में से बैंक लोन है तो बैंक की मूलधनराशि मय ब्याज बैंक को तथा अवशेष धनराशि वादी को प्रतिवादी भुगतान करेगा। 3. प्रतिवादी बढ़े हुये एरिया व अतिरिक्त चार्जेज के सम्बंध में पूर्ण विवरण वादी को उपलब्ध करायें तथा हस्ताक्षरित अनुबंध के अनुसार धनराशि प्राप्त कर सकता है।

4. यदि वादी द्वारा fers किश्तों का भुगतान नहीं किया गया है तो प्रतिवादी विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज पाने का अधिकारी है परन्तु यह ब्याज MCLR + 4% की दर से अधिक देय नहीं होगा। 5. जहां तक प्रतिपूर्ति (compensation) fear जाने का प्रश्न है तो इस सम्बंध में वाद न्‍्यायनिर्णायक अधिकारी (adjudicating officer) को संदर्भित किया जाए। इस आदेश का उल्लघंन उ0प्र0भू-सम्पदा (विनियमन तथा विकास) अधिनियम, 20i6 की धारा-63 तथा अन्य सुसंगत प्राविधानों के अन्तर्गत दंडनीय होगा। आदेश पोर्टल पर अपलोड किया जाये। दिनांक : 26.09.2049 dir बलविन्दर कुमार) (सदस्य) उ0प्र0 भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण

उ0प्र0 भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण, क्षेत्रीय कार्यालय, गौतमबुद्धनगर। सुनवाई पीठ-3 उपस्थिति :- श्री बलविन्दर कुमार, सदस्य Rx) शिकायत संख्या : 4220:827249 बीरेन्द्र कुमार सिंह, निवासी- सी 4/7, द्वितीय तल रजनी गंधा हाउसिंग सोसायटी वालहिकरावड़ी पुणे Tat बनाम निराला हाउसिंग प्राणलिए पता: 443, 447a फ्लोर कैलाश बिल्डिंग, whe न. 26 eee गांधी मार्ग नई eee प्रतिवादी अधि-निर्णय प्रस्तुत वाद वादी द्वारा प्रतिवादी के विरूद्ध जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या यूनिट का कब्जा मय विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज व प्रतिपूर्ति (Compensation) दिलाये जाने हेतु संस्थित किया गया है। संक्षेप में वादी का कथन है कि प्रतिवादी द्वारा संचालित परियोजना Nirala Aspire Phase | में यूनिट संख्या A3— 804 बुक किया था, जिसके एवज में वादी ने प्रतिवादी को BO 43,04,560/— भुगतान किया था। वादी द्वारा प्रस्तुत लिखित अभिकथन में यह उल्लेख किया गया है कि केता-विकेता अनुबंध पत्र पर दिनांक 34.05.2043 को दोनो पक्षों के मध्य हस्ताक्षर हुआ था, जिसके अनुसार यूनिट का कब्जा जून 20i6 तक प्राप्त होना था। वादी द्वारा यह कथन किया गया है कि प्रतिवादी ने दिनांक 28.06.20i8 को ईमेल के माध्यम से ऑफर ऑफ पजेशन प्रेषित किया *परन्तु वादी द्वारा ऑफर ऑफ पजेशन को लेने से इंकार कर दिया गया जिसके निम्न कारण वादी द्वारा बताये गये है:- 4. प्रतिवादी द्वारा कब्जा दिये जाने में काफी विलम्ब किया गया। 2. प्रतिवादी द्वारा विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज भी नहीं दिया गया। WMA 3. प्रतिवादी द्वारा किचन के ले-ऑउट बदल दिये जाने के सम्बंध में परिवादी से सम्पर्क नहीं किया गया और प्रतिपूर्ति भी नहीं दी गयी। 4. वादी ने लिखित अभिकथन के प्रस्तर संख्या 3 में यह उल्लेख किया है कि

“The complainant was also assured by the representative of the respondent that the difference between the carpet area and super area could not be more than 30 % but at time of the offer of the possession of the flat the loading is more than 65%, Even the respondent itself mentioned the carpet of the flat is 886 square feet upon UPRERA website. The complainant was also assured for the discount of 3% of the basic cost of the flat and same has been informed by the E-mail dated 26-09-202 sent by the respondent to the complainant but later on the respondent has reduced the percentage of the discount from the 30 to 2% without any reason and took the additional amount from the ‘compalinant.” अतः वादी ने जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या यूनिट का कब्जा मय विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज व प्रतिपूर्ति (Compensation) दिलाये जाने हेतु अनुरोध किया है। वादी ने वादपत्र के समर्थन में लिखित अभिकथन, ईमेल संवाद व प्रतिउत्तर की छायाप्रति दाखिल किये है। प्राधिकरण की ओर से प्रतिवादी को नोटिस जारी किये गये और जिसकी तामीला प्रतिवादी पर सम्यक रूप से की गयी। प्रतिवादी अधिवक्ता द्वारा प्रतिवादपत्र प्रस्तुत किया गया। प्रतिवादपत्र के प्रस्तर संख्या 4, 3 व 4 में यह अंकित किया गया है कि “ Para-t: It is pertinent to mention here that respondent has already got the OC for the said tower and registries are already being executed of the respective flat buyers, therefore this Hon'ble forum may direct the complainant to get its sub-lease deed registered instead of indulging in false and frivolous litigations.

Para: It is further specifically wrong and denied that the complainant was also assured by the representative of the respondent that the difference between the carpet area and super area could not be more than 30% but at the yes time of offer of possession of the flat the loading is more than 65%, It is further specifically wrong and denied that even the respondent itself mentioned the carpet area of the flat is 886 sq ft.upon UP RERA Website. . It is further specifically wrong and denied that the complainant was also assured for the discount of 3% of the basic cost of the flat. and same has been informed by the e-mail dated 26,0०9. sent by the respondent to the complainant but later on the respondent has reduced the percentage of discount from 3% to 2% without any reason and took the additional amount from the complainant .On the contrary it is submitted that complainant himself has approached the answering respondent for booking the flat in question and upon his persistent request as he was not the resident of NCR, handsome discount was given to him." Para-4: It is further submitted that the complainant himself admitted that as per the allotment letter /agreement the total cost of the flat isn question is /was रि5.4,62,776 plus service tax as applicable therefore no PLC was mentioned in that and even in the confirmation letter no PLC has been charged extra as alleged by the complainant.

सुना एवं पत्रावली का अवलोकन किया। पत्रावली के अवलोकन से विदित हुआ कि पत्रावली पर अनुबंध पत्र की प्रति उपलब्ध नहीं है। प्रतिवादी हस्ताक्षारित अनुबंध पत्र में अंकित अनुपात के हिसाब से ही एरिया बढ़ा सकता तथा अन्य चार्जेज प्राप्त कर सकता है। उपरोक्त विश्लेषण से स्पष्ट है कि वादी जमा धनराशि मय ब्याज या अपनी यूनिट का कब्जा चाहता है और जब तक उसकी यूनिट नही दी जाती है, तब तक उसे विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज दिलाया जाये। इस सम्बंध में उल्लेखनीय है कि :- Under the Act, obligation of promotes has been provided under Sect 44 (4), which reads as: The promoter shall— (a) be responsible for all obligations, > responsibilities and functions under the provisions of this Act or the rules and regulations made there under or to the allottees as per the agreement for sale, or to the association of allottees, as the case may be, till the conveyance of all the apartments, plots or buildings, as the case may be, to the allottees, or the common areas to the association of allottees or the competent authority, as the case may be. fla On the other hand, rights and duties of allottee have been clearly provided under the Act. Sub-section 4 of Section 49 Read as under;(4) The allottee shall be entitled to claim the refund of amount paid along with interest at such rate as may be prescribed and compensation in the manner as provided under this Act, from the promoter, if the promoter fails to comply or is unable to give possession of the apartment, plot or building, as the case may be, in accordance with the

+ terms of agreement for sale or due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of his registration under the provisions of this Act or the rules or regulations made there under. Besides, Section 48 (2)/#0५/4०९5 that “If the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment, plot or building, in accordance with the terms of the agreement for sale or, as the case may be, duly completed by the date specified therein; or (b) due to discontinuance of his business as a developer on account of suspension or revocation of the registration under this Act or for any other reason, he shall be liable on demand to the allottees, in case the allottee wishes to withdraw from the project, without prejudice to any other remedy available, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment, plot, building, as the case may be, with interest at such rate as may be prescribed in this behalf including compensation in the manner as provided under this Act: Provided that where an allottee does not intend to withdraw ‘from the project, he shall be paid, by the promoter, interest for every month of delay, till the handing over of the possession, at such rate as may be prescribed.

If we read these provisions conjointly, the language of these provisions suggest that if the promoter/developer fails to fulfill his obligations to handover the possession as per terms of the agreement, the allottee is entitled to claim refund. However, different Authorities set up under the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act,2046 across the country are taking a balanced /pragmatic view as far as refund to the allottees of project is concerned when the projects are at a much more advance stage of development. Authorities are considering the situation of allottees of a real estate project as well as status of the project i.e stage of construction , timelines for completion, tentative possible ‘offer date of possession’ from the developer/promoter, possible consensus of the allotee in acceptance of possession within the possible new ‘offer date of possession’ * etc. Section 32 of the RERA Act deals with functions of the Authority for promotion of Real Estate Sector. This Section reads as: The Authority shall in order to facilitate the growth and promotion of a healthy, transparent, efficient and competitive real estate sector make recommendations to the appropriate Government of the competent authority, as the case may be, on,(a) protection of interest of the allottees, promoter and real estate agent;(b).. (%)...........-४०/.. "डॉ... (9)....««««< ४.....ल्‍०6०«* / (i) any other issue that the Authority may think necessary for the promotion of the real estate sector.”

On the other hand, Section 38 of the RERA Act, which deals with powers of the Authority expect the authority/RERA to act on the principle of natural justice. The Section reads as (7) The Authority shall have powers to impose penalty or interest, in regard to any contravention of obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents, under this Act or the rules and the regulations made there under. (2) The Authority shall be guided by the principles _ of natural justice and, subject to the other provisions of this Act and the rules made there under, the Authority shall have powers to regulate its own procedure” This provision confer power to the Authority to impose penalty or interest, in regard to any contravention of obligations cast upon the promoters, the allottees and the real estate agents for contravention of any provisions of the Act and Rules made there under and it also provides that the Authority shall be guided by the principles of natural justice. If we read these provisions together along with the scheme of the Act, the Authority is created not only to protect interest of the allottee of the real estate project but also to protect the interest of promoters in order to promote a healthy growth of the real estate sector Thus, from the provisions referred above and view taken by the different authorities, it is clear that complainant

_ has right to withdraw from the project if promoter failed to deliver the flat/unit within the time specified in the agreement. However, different real estate regulatory Authorities are deciding matters and awarding refund on the basis of fact of each case considering stage of construction of the project and period and reasons of delay in handing over the possession to homebuyers. In any case, the promoter will be required to pay interest on delayed period till the date of possession. इस सम्बंध में माननीय उच्चतम न्यायालय द्वारा सिविल अपील to 744/20:7 चित्रा. शर्मा आदि बनाम यूनियन ऑफ इंडिया आदि में किया गया आब्जरवेशन महत्वपूर्ण है :- " 40. The figures........ which have been made available presently, following the opening of the web portal by the amicus curiae, indicate that 8% of the home buyers have sought a refund of their monies while 92% would evidently prefer possession of the homes which they have purchased. We cannot be unmindful of the interests of 92% of the home buyers many of whom would also have obtained loans to secure a home. They would have a legitimate grievance if the corpus of Rs 750 crores (together with accrued interest) is distributed to the home buyers who seek a refund." इस स्टेज पर रियल एस्टेट सेक्टर की वर्तमान वित्तीय स्थिति को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए धनराशि वापस किये जाने से उन आवंटियों के हित प्रतिकूलत: प्रभावित होने संभावित है, जो कि यूनिट का कब्जा लेना चाहते हैं। ऐसी स्थिति में धनवापसी किया जाना उचित प्रतीत नही होता है

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 अवधि तथा मूल धनराशि पर ब्याज देय होगा, क्योंकि प्रमोटर्स द्वारा उक्त धनराशि का उपभोग किया गया है। अतः वादी को कब्जा व विलम्बित अवधि पर ब्याज कब्जा की तिथि तक दिलाया जाना न्यायोचित प्रतीत होता है। आदेश 4. प्रतिवादी को आदेशित किया जाता है कि occupation. certificate के साथ वादी को नवम्बर 20I9 तक यूनिट का भौतिक कब्जा (physical possession) उपलब्ध कराये। साथ ही शिकायतकर्ता व प्रमोटर के बीच हुये BTR Builders Buyers Agreement (BBA) के अनुसार विलम्बित अवधि / delayed period & सम्बंध में दिनांक 30.04.20:6 तक 88 में उल्लिखित TS/penalty के अनुसार तथा दिनांक 04.05.2046 Real Estate Regulation & Development, Act 2046 के लागू होने की तिथि) से ओससी प्राप्त होने की तिथि तक MCLR + % की दर से प्रमोटर द्वारा दण्ड AT /penal interest अदा किया जाएगा। ब्याज /दण्ड की इस धनराशि को कब्जा दिये जाने के समय अंतिम देय धनराशि में समायोजित की जाएगी। हैं 2. यदि प्रतिवादी वादी को नवम्बर 2049 तक यूनिट का कब्जा उपलब्ध कराने में असफल रहा तो नवम्बर 2049 के उपरांत 45 दिन में वादी द्वारा yor जमा की गयी धनराशि जमा करने की तिथि से भुगतान की तिथि तक मय ब्याज MCLR + % की दर से भुगतान करेगा। ऐसी स्थिति में यदि उक्त धनराशि में से बैंक लोन है तो बैंक की मूलधनराशि मय ब्याज बैंक को तथा अवशेष धनराशि वादी को प्रतिवादी भुगतान करेगा। 3. प्रतिवादी बढ़े हुये एरिया व अतिरिक्त चार्जेज के सम्बंध में पूर्ण विवरण वादी को उपलब्ध करायें तथा हस्ताक्षरित अनुबंध के अनुसार धनराशि प्राप्त कर सकता है।

4. यदि वादी द्वारा fers किश्तों का भुगतान नहीं किया गया है तो प्रतिवादी विलम्बित अवधि का ब्याज पाने का अधिकारी है परन्तु यह ब्याज MCLR + 4% की दर से अधिक देय नहीं होगा। 5. जहां तक प्रतिपूर्ति (compensation) fear जाने का प्रश्न है तो इस सम्बंध में वाद न्‍्यायनिर्णायक अधिकारी (adjudicating officer) को संदर्भित किया जाए। इस आदेश का उल्लघंन उ0प्र0भू-सम्पदा (विनियमन तथा विकास) अधिनियम, 20i6 की धारा-63 तथा अन्य सुसंगत प्राविधानों के अन्तर्गत दंडनीय होगा। आदेश पोर्टल पर अपलोड किया जाये। दिनांक : 26.09.2049 dir बलविन्दर कुमार) (सदस्य) उ0प्र0 भू-सम्पदा विनियामक प्राधिकरण