Dear Residents, Allottess,
I am Delighted to Share my views on-going Ansal Raisina Issue.
Monday, 30 August 2021
Hon'ble HREAT Judgement
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001| Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
30.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble
H-REAT court in the recent case of-
Godrej
Premium Builders Pvt. Ltd. V/s Avtar Singh
Held that
impugned orders are without jurisdiction, so the appellants have a strong prima
facie case in their favour. This Tribunal is satisfied that the entire purpose
of filing the present appeal shall be frustrated by ordering the appellants to
first deposit the awarded amount as a pre-condition for the entertainment of
the present appeal. The case in hand is a deserving case where the appellants
are entitled for the complete waiver of the condition of pre deposit as the
impugned order being prima facie without jurisdiction.
All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of
Residents Welfare Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE
III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
Judgement of Hon'ble HREAT
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001| Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
30.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd.
Versus
Santosh
Chauhan
Held
that The Hon’ble High Court in Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of
Haryana and others’ case (Supra) has laid down that the amended rules shall be
applicable retrospectively as the amendment is procedural one and the pending
complaints shall be decided as per the amended rules. Reference can be made to
para no.72 of the aforesaid judgment, which reads as under: - “72. In view of
the settled legal position, the position that emerges is this. As long as the
complaint is yet to be decided as on the date of the notification publishing
the Haryana Amendment Rules 2019, that will now be decided consistent with the
procedure outlined under the amended Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana Rules. In other
words, if the pending or future complaint seeks only compensation or interest
by way of compensation, and no other relief, it will be examined only by the
AO. If the pending or future complaint seeks other reliefs i.e. other than
compensation or interest by way of compensation, the complaint will have to be
examined by the Authority and not the AO. If the pending or future complaint
seeks a combination of reliefs, the complaint will have to be examined first by
the Authority. If the Authority finds there to be a violation of Sections 12,
14, 18 and 19 of the Act by the promoter, and the complaint is by the allottee,
then for determining the quantum of compensation such complaint will be
referred by the Authority to the AO in terms of the amended Rule 28 of the
Haryana Rules. A complaint that has already been adjudicated prior to the
coming into force of the amended Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana, and the
decision has attained finality, will not stand reopened.” In view of the
amended rules which have become applicable to the present proceedings and the
authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court in Experion Developers
Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of Haryana and others’ case (Supra), the contentions
raised by learned counsel for the appellant are without any substance.
All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
Friday, 27 August 2021
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION
V-3/11
DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|
Phone:
0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
28.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Landmark Apartments Pvt. Ltd.
Versus
Amit
Sharma
Held
that The Hon’ble High Court in Experion Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of
Haryana and others’ case (Supra) has laid down that the amended rules shall be
applicable retrospectively as the amendment is procedural one and the pending
complaints shall be decided as per the amended rules. Reference can be made to
para no.72 of the aforesaid judgment, which reads as under: - “72. In view of
the settled legal position, the position that emerges is this. As long as the
complaint is yet to be decided as on the date of the notification publishing
the Haryana Amendment Rules 2019, that will now be decided consistent with the
procedure outlined under the amended Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana Rules. In
other words, if the pending or future complaint seeks only compensation or
interest by way of compensation, and no other relief, it will be examined only
by the AO. If the pending or future complaint seeks other reliefs i.e. other
than compensation or interest by way of compensation, the complaint will have
to be examined by the Authority and not the AO. If the pending or future
complaint seeks a combination of reliefs, the complaint will have to be
examined first by the Authority. If the Authority finds there to be a violation
of Sections 12, 14, 18 and 19 of the Act by the promoter, and the complaint is
by the allottee, then for determining the quantum of compensation such
complaint will be referred by the Authority to the AO in terms of the amended
Rule 28 of the Haryana Rules. A complaint that has already been adjudicated
prior to the coming into force of the amended Rules 28 and 29 of the Haryana,
and the decision has attained finality, will not stand reopened.” In view of
the amended rules which have become applicable to the present proceedings and
the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble High Court in Experion
Developers Pvt. Ltd. Versus State of Haryana and others’ case (Supra), the
contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellant are without any
substance.
All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|
Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
28.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Alpha Corp. Development Pvt. Ltd.
Vs.
Anil
Kumar
Held
that Shri Munish Kapila, Advocate, Ld. counsel for the respondent-allottee has
very fairly pleaded that the question with respect to the delay in offer of
possession and consequent payment of the delayed compensation is yet to be
decided by the Ld. Authority on merits of the case. Thus, in order to safeguard
the interest of the appellant promoter, it will be suffice to mention that
anything observed by the Ld. Authority in the impugned orders with respect to
the delay in offering/delivering possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee and directions for payment of reasonable compensation by
way of amicable settlement of the dispute, will not prejudice the mind of the
Ld. Authority to adjudicate the question regarding payment of interest for any
delay in delivery of the possession. It is obvious that in order to determine
as to whether, the appellant-promoter is liable for payment of any interest for
delayed possession or not, the Ld. Authority has to first determine as to
whether there was any delay in offering the possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee. If so, whether the delay was attributable to the
appellant-promoter and if these questions are decided against the
appellant-promoter, then, the Ld. Authority will proceed to determine the
quantum of interest payable to the respondent allottee for delayed possession. All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
Thursday, 26 August 2021
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|
Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
27.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Alpha Corp Development Pvt. Ltd.
V/s
Baldev
Kumar Bajaj
Held
that Shri Munish Kapila, Advocate, Ld. counsel for the respondent-allottee has
very fairly pleaded that the question with respect to the delay in offer of
possession and consequent payment of the delayed compensation is yet to be
decided by the Ld. Authority on merits of the case. Thus, in order to safeguard
the interest of the appellant promoter, it will be suffice to mention that
anything observed by the Ld. Authority in the impugned orders with respect to
the delay in offering/delivering possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee and directions for payment of reasonable compensation by
way of amicable settlement of the dispute, will not prejudice the mind of the
Ld. Authority to adjudicate the question regarding payment of interest for any
delay in delivery of the possession. It is obvious that in order to determine
as to whether, the appellant-promoter is liable for payment of any interest for
delayed possession or not, the Ld. Authority has to first determine as to
whether there was any delay in offering the possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee. If so, whether the delay was attributable to the
appellant-promoter and if these questions are decided against the
appellant-promoter, then, the Ld. Authority will proceed to determine the
quantum of interest payable to the respondent allottee for delayed possession. All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124
4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
V-3/11
DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|
Phone:
0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
27.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Alpha Corp Development Pvt. Ltd.
V/s
Sunila
Bajaj
The
Hon’ble HREAT Court in this case held that Shri Munish Kapila, Advocate, Ld.
counsel for the respondent-allottee has pleaded that the question with respect
to the delay in offer of possession and consequent payment of the delayed compensation
is yet to be decided by the Ld. Authority on merits of the case. Thus, in order
to safeguard the interest of the appellant promoter, it will be suffice to
mention that anything observed by the Ld. Authority in the impugned orders with
respect to the delay in offering/delivering possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee and directions for payment of reasonable compensation by
way of amicable settlement of the dispute, will not prejudice the mind of the
Ld. Authority to adjudicate the question regarding payment of interest for any
delay in delivery of the possession. It is obvious that in order to determine
as to whether, the appellant-promoter is liable for payment of any interest for
delayed possession or not, the Ld. Authority has to first determine as to
whether there was any delay in offering the possession of the plot to the
respondent-allottee. If so, whether the delay was attributable to the
appellant-promoter and if these questions are decided against the
appellant-promoter, then, the Ld. Authority will proceed to determine the
quantum of interest payable to the respondent allottee for delayed possession.
All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
Wednesday, 25 August 2021
FEDERATION OF
RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
26.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Alta Vista Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.
Versus
M/s
Haryana State Industrial & Infrastructure
Development
Corporation Ltd.
Held
that Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn our attention to the Estate
Management Procedures (EMP), 2015, Chapter-4, As
per the aforesaid clause, the Corporation will offer the physical possession
after completing the basic infrastructure facilities comprising of motorable
road, water supply system, sewerage disposal network along with certain other
requirements. So, even as per their own Estate Management Procedures, it was
the duty of the respondent’s corporation to complete the sewerage disposal
network before offering the possession. The
relevant provisions of the Act have come into force w.e.f. 01.05.2017. On that
date, there was no motorable road in front of the plot of the appellant; there
was no water supply system and the sewerage disposal network is not yet
complete. The physical possession of the plot has not been offered to the
appellant even today. So, we are of the considered opinion that the provisions
of the Act have become applicable to the project in question and the learned
Authority was required to adjudicate the complaint filed by the appellant on
merits. The view taken by the learned Authority that it has no jurisdiction as
the allotment was made in the year 2008, is totally erroneous as the
respondents/promoter have yet to fulfil their obligations. Consequently, the
impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. Thus,
keeping in view our aforesaid discussions, the present appeal is hereby
allowed.
All the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATIONS
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001|Phone: 0124-4014318; 0124-4990107
26.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Alpha Corp Development Pvt. Ltd.
V/s
Neelam
Rani and Another
Held
that in para no.4(i) of the impugned order dated 11.02.2020 it has been
observed that relationship between the parties is till subsisting since it is
an admitted fact that the respondent-allottee has not given possession of the
plot to the complainant. Ld. counsel for the appellant-promoter has raised his
contentions with respect to these observations made by the Ld. Authority
expressing apprehension that the Ld. Authority has pre-judged the case and had
observed that the appellant-promoter had not delivered the possession and has
been directed to pay the reasonable compensation in order to safeguard the
interest of the appellant promoter, it will be suffice to mention that anything
observed by the Ld. Authority in the impugned orders with respect to the delay
in offering/delivering possession of the plot to the respondent-allottee and
directions for payment of reasonable compensation by way of amicable settlement
of the dispute, will not prejudice the mind of the Ld. Authority to adjudicate
the question regarding payment of interest for any delay in delivery of the
possession. It is obvious that in order to determine as to whether, the
appellant-promoter is liable for payment of any interest for delayed possession
or not, the Ld. Authority has to first determine as to whether there was any
delay in offering the possession of the plot to the respondent-allottee. If so,
whether the delay was attributable to the appellant-promoter and if these questions
are decided against the appellant-promoter, then, the Ld. Authority will
proceed to determine the quantum of interest payable to the respondent allottee
for delayed possession.
All the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
Tuesday, 24 August 2021
FEDERATION OF RESIDENTS’ WELFARE ASSOCIATION
V-3/11 DLF Phase- III Gurugram-122001| Phone: 0124-4014318;
0124-4990107
25.08.2021
Dear Members,
The Hon’ble H-REAT court in the recent
case of-
M/s
Omaxe Ltd. & Anr.
Vs.
Dr.
Seema Jain & Anr.
Held
that issues raised by Ld. counsel for the respondents relate to the merits of
the case. The present appeal is only against the interim Order and the
grievance raised by the appellantpromoter is with respect to the appointment of
Baldev Garg & Co. Chartered
Accountant to examine the records of the respondents. In the present case, the
allotment of only one unit is involved and for the adjudication of such
dispute, in our view, this type of fishing enquiry by the Chartered Accountant
should not be indulged into. The information sought by the Ld. Authority in
Para 7 of the impugned order can be extracted by way of affidavit of the
Director of the appellant-promoter. Thus, the impugned order dated 04th March,
2020 passed by the Ld. Authority is hereby modified. Instead of any examination
of the records by the Chartered Accountant,the Director of the company,
well-conversant with the facts of the case, will file his affidavit with
respect to all the 5 points formed by the Ld. Authority in the impugned order
with the Ld. Authority within a period of four weeks with advance copy to Ld.
counsel for the respondents-allottees. The respondents-allottees will also be
entitled to file the counter-affidavit, if they so desire.
All
the best,
God bless u all
President,
Federation of Residents Welfare
Association
V 3/11 DLF PHASE III
GURUGRAM-122002
HARYANA,
0124 4-14318,0124 4990107,08860332404.
Kuldeep Kumar Kohli
PRESIDENT
FEDERATION
OF RESIDENTS WELFARE ASSOCIATION
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)