MahaRERA ordered a developer to refund a signing amount of Rs 20 lakh, plus interest, to a homebuyer for failing to give possession of the apartment on the promised date. The couple had complained that though they were not required to pay EMIs for the loan taken for the apartment until they took possession, the finance company had begun levying it after the lapse of the promised possession date. This left them with no option but to cancel the allotment.
MahaRERA ruled that the homebuyers were forced to pay EMIs because the flat was not delivered on said date and ordered Epitome Residency Pvt Ltd to give back the money. The developer has appealed against the order to the appellate authority and claims the homebuyers didn't disclose all the facts.
Bhuvanesh Shrivastava and Priyali Saxena booked a flat in Imperial Heights in Goregaon by paying Rs 20.09 lakh in May 2016. The total price of the flat was Rs 2.03 crore. Epitome Residency issued an allotment letter promising possession by September 30, 2017. On May 2016, a tripartite agreement was executed whereby the homebuyers subrogated their rights to receive refund in favour of the lender. The builder further stated that the homebuyers even signed a declaration-cum-indemnity bond citing reasons for delay in execution of the agreement for sale.
Shirvastava and Saxena cancelled the allotment letter along with tripartite loan agreement in May 2018, citing absence of possession.
MahaRERA member Dr Vijay Satbir Singh ordered the developer to refund the signing amount, plus interest. He said Epitome Residency would have to make a payment of the outstanding amount to the finance company since it has already utilised the money beyond the stipulated date. "I have learned hard way," said Shirvastava, adding, "and I will not invest in under-construction property."
"This is not a case of RERA violation," said advocate Vibha Krishna, representing Epitome Residency Pvt Ltd. "Bhuvanesh faced financial difficulties on April 10, 2017 and hence executed a declaration-cum-indemnity where he requested to continue to hold the flat on booking form. He then gave an undertaking to not make any claim until execution of agreement or possession of the flat. During the hearing, he was offered the flat with occupation certificate, which he refused. In the declaration-cum-indemnity, he had undertaken to make all payments. The complaint did not disclose complete true facts." Source: DNA India
As indicated by segment 11(2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, the ad or outline issued or distributed by the promoter is required to say the site address of the expert wherein all points of interest of the enrolled venture are entered and incorporate the undertaking's MahaRERA enlistment number.