Sana Realtors Private Limited v. The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority And Others
!
"#$$ %& '
()$(
% *+& %& '
()),
% *+& %,& '
-,
% *+& %-& '
-,$
% *+& %$& '
-,)
% *+& %)& '
-,
% *+& %(& '
-
% *+& %& '
-,
% *+& %& '
-,-
% *+& %& '
-
% *+& %& '
-,,
% *+& ."
/ 0! 0 1 2 3 4
"
0 0!6!
7 08"
/!
96/ 0867 0 8"4 7 0!
!:
"4 "! ;;;
+# <2+ .+ 2 . <2+ .22 ====
!
"#
!
"
##$ %
#$ %
&
!'( )&*+,&-&. ////
3 / ". "97 > % 0/& !,0-0+,!'(,&-&& !'( .0+10&-&- !,+202,!'(,&-&& !'( .0++*&-&- !,0.3),!'(,&-&& !'( )&*.&-&.
!,0-)1,!'(,&-&& !'( )&*1&-&.
!,0.0&,!'(,&-&& !'( )&*+&-&.
!,02.1,!'(,&-&& !'( )&*-&-&.
!,0203,!'(,&-&& !'( )&&2&-&.
!,0202,!'(,&-&& !'( )&*&&-&.
!,3-20,!'(,&-&& !'( )&*)&-&.
!,3*-+,!'(,&-&& !'( )&&3&-&.
!,3*-0,!'(,&-&& !'( )&**&-&.
#4 % #
% 5# % # #
#4 % 5% # 45
6 % 5 ##45% #, 5 7 # $ )* 1
% 8# &-.+9 ! , : &
!'(,)&*+, &-&.
% %4 4 % 4 4 5# % # # 4 5 % # 4 %## #
!;4 #
5 5 % + "!
!
#4
< < 5#
5 5
4% 5 # #4 # 55 #
#
# 5# % # 54 #54# %
% % % # = ;4 # # # 4 % % 5 %
*-.-&-&- #
54 #4 # % #
45 % 5 4 5 % # '
%# # 45%#
#4 # 5
45# %, 5# 5 % 6 5 4
$#! <+?!
@ 7 0!"4 / :
0! 124.
"4
7 0!<> %& % 1 /&,$( 5 #4 <."
/ 0! 0 1 2 3 4 "
"
"4 "4 7 0!<>.2 %& ,$
$>( 5
#
# %# @ 7< =
;4 # 4 % %
# :
# 5 5 6
?
&&+ ! @
" 4 % 03 .*+ .*0 %# @ 7<
A, B78. This Court while interpreting Section 18 of the Act, in Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni and Another, 2020(10) SCC 783 held that Section 18 confers an unqualified right upon an allottee to get refund of the amount deposited with the promoter and interest at the prescribed rate, if the promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment as per the date specified in the home buyer's agreement in para 25 held as under:- "25. In terms of Section 18 of the RERA Act, if a promoter fails to complete or is unable to give possession of an apartment duly completed by the date specified in the agreement, the promoter would be liable, on demand, to return the amount received by him in respect of that apartment if the allottee wishes to withdraw from the Project. Such right of an allottee is specifically made "without prejudice to any other remedy available to him". The right so given to the allottee is unqualified and if availed, the money deposited by the allottee has to be refunded with interest at such rate as
CWP-17657-2020 and other connected cases -5may be prescribed. The proviso to Section 18(1) contemplates a situation where the allottee does not intend to withdraw from the Project. In that case he is entitled to and must be paid interest for every month of delay till the handing over of the possession. It is up to the allottee to proceed either under Section 18(1) or under proviso to Section 18(1). The case of Himanshu Giri came under the latter category. The RERA Act thus definitely provides a remedy to an allottee who wishes to withdraw from the Project or claim return on his investment." ?
?
?
?
.*+ @ %
4 % % %% @ 5 % %
#5
;
% 45 # 5
% % # % # #4 #
4 % 4 ; .*0 @
5 % #, $ )* 1 5 % # #4
5 % # #54:
# 54 # 4 % # #4
# 54 4 5 5 # # , % $ )* 1 #5
54 .) .2 .
% ! @
C
# 4
> % #
!'( )&*+,&-&.
5# %#5 #54
4&-.- 4 % 5 % 4&-.* 5 # 54 % 4= ;4 B C %5 4 5 %# % %# $#! 0A"!//.7" "4"
7 0 "4 " / 0:"24"4 7 0!
, %.& "
"
"4 * 0! " "!06 " 124> %,& % 1 /& "5#
? %
&&+ ! @
#
% 4 4 % @ 5
5# 4 4&-.0 5 54 #54
#54 !'( )&*+&-&.%4 5 4 5% 54
5 54 6 5 %
% %# 5 5
% # 5# # %#% 5 #54
% %
54
6 %
# 4
%
5 %#
5 4 %
%
8# &-.+ 5 4 54( # #54 $#!
% , 03 %# @ 7< 5
5 4 %
#54 ; %
% ,.*0
#
, %
$ )* 1
5 .).2 .
% ! @
5
4 % 4 $#!
@
4
< " 3 "
124%
0/8B"
@"! " 3 " 0 1 2 3 4& .
6"CA"4 7 0!< % 4
#
%
"
% !
, &&+ ! @
% 5 4
% ,.*0 @ 7< !;4
# " 4 5 54 5 6 5
# %, ; #$ )* 1 &-.+ D <; #*- 4 % # , 5 6 5
*- 4 #
# 4 %+ 2 .& %22 & $$
'
%:
E: '
5 E: