BEFORE THE ADJUDICATING OFFICER, HARYANA REAL

ESTATE REGULATORY, GURUGRAM, HARYANA

Complaint Case No RERA–GRG–_____-2020

IN THE MATTER:

Sh. Veenu Chopra

….COMPLAINANT

VERSUS

M/s International Land Developers Private Limited & Ors.

…RESPONDENTS

SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES

This is with reference to the Residential Group Housing Colony

Project “ARETE” being DEVELOPED AND MARKETED by

International Land Developers Private Limited on the land

falling in the Sector 33 of Village Dhunela, Sohna, Gurugram,

Haryana which is owned by International Land Developers

Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as “ILD”) and under

the license issued by the Government of Haryana, vide letter

No44of 2013, issued by Director General, Town & Country

Planning, Chandigarh, Government of Haryana in the name of

ILD.

The Complainant, despite having paid a considerable amount

of Rs. 17,95,500.00 on 26,12,2013 and subsequently

4,71,730.00 on 1.11.2014 was somehow not feeling

comfortable and convinced with the situation on the site and

hence the Respondent could not instill the confidence in the

complainant that the Respondent will be able to deliver the

project.

Though the complainant made the above payment against the

total Consideration, specifically the last payment of a sum of

Rs. 4, 71,730.00 on 1.11.2014, which was to be paid on

commencement of excavation, as per the allotment letter dated

6.4.2014, the actual excavation work was not initiated at all

hence the total reluctance on the part of the complainant to

make any payment against this when it was initially

demanded on 1.5.2014. The Respondents was failing to adhere

to the schedule of completion attached with the allotment

letter and hence asking for payment was amounting to illegally

extraction of money from the complainant by making false

demands, which were not consistent with the progress on the

site. Actually, there was hardly any activity going on at the site

and the payment collected by the Respondents was more than

the activity undertaken on the site. The complainant felt he

was being subjected to unethical/unfair trade practice. The

above said acts of the Respondents clearly state that the

Respondents with prejudice have been indulging in unfair

trade practices and have also been providing gross deficient

services. All such Acts and omissions on the part of the

Respondents caused an immeasurable mental stress and

agony to the Complainant. That by having intentionally and

knowingly induced and having falsely mis-represented to the

Complainant on the construction activity at site and by giving

false delivery schedules and thereby making the complainant

to act in accordance to its misrepresentations, and owing to all

the deliberate lapses/delays on the part of the Respondents,

the Respondents are liable as being requisitioned/claimed by

the Complainant to pay the entire amount collected by them

 with interest from the date of receipt of the individual

payments. The list of dates leading to file the present petition

is as under:

DATE PARTICULAR
2013 The Directorate of Town & Country Planning

Haryana issued a License On 4.6.2013 bearing No.

44 of 2013, in favour of M/s International Land

Developers Pvt. Ltd and others for setting up a

Group Housing Colony at Sector 32 Dhunda,

Sohna, Gurugram for a project called “ARETE”

2013 Respondent company announced the launch of

‘ARETE’ Group Housing Project. The complainant

while searching for a flat/accommodation were lured

by the advertisements and calls from the agents of the

Respondents for buying a house in their project

namely ‘ARETE’ situated at Sector 33, Dhunela,

Sohna, Gurugram. The agents and officers of the

Respondents company told the complainant about the

moonshine reputation of the company and the agents

of the Respondent Company made huge presentations

 about the project mentioned above and also assured

that they have delivered several projects in the

National Capital Region prior to this project. The

Respondents handed over one brochure to the

complainant which projected a very interesting

landscaping of the said Project to incite the

complainant to part with their hard earned money by

way of making payments. The Complainant after being

represented by the opposite parties that the opposite

parties have taken all due approvals, sanctions and

Government permission towards development and

construction of ‘ARETE’ Project and after been

represented through brochures, about the facilities to

be provided and the Complainant having been

impressed decided to invest their hard earned money

in purchasing the apartment at ‘ARETE’ Project.

2.2013 to The complainant booked an apartment measuring

5.2013 tentative super area as 1800 sq ft at a tentative basic

price of Rs. 3990.00 per sft through an application of

registration and a copy of the same is attached as

Annexure C/1 and together with which the

complainant also gave a cheque No. 053-097127

dated 8.2.2013 for Rs. 6 lakhs drawn on Hongkong

& Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. F 43, South

Extension Part I Branch, New Delhi in favor of .

Subsequently on 18.5.2013 the complainant made

another payment of Rs. 11,95, 500.00 through a

cheque No. 053-097127-006 dated 18.5.2013

drawn on Honkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation

Lt Both the cheques were taken by the Respondent in

the name of Alm Infotech City Private Limited. Alm

Infotech City Private Limited's Corporate Identification

Number is (CIN) U72900DL2000PTC104762 and its

registration number is 104762.Its Email address is

cs@ild.co.in and its registered address is B-418 NEW

FRIENDS COLONY NEW DELHI DL 110065, which is

required to be paid on booking and within 60 days of

the application, respectively.

That Section 13 of RERA 2016 is absolutely clear and

reads as under:

No deposit or advance to be taken by the promoter

without first entering into agreement for sale –

(1) A promoter shall not accept a sum more than

ten percent, of the cost of the apartment, plot or

building as the case may be, as an advance

payment or an application fee, from a person

without first entering into a written agreement

fors sale with such person and register the said

agreement for sale, under any law for the time

being in force.

Agreement for sale has been defined in Section 2

Clause © as under:

“ Agreement for sale” means an agreement entered into

between the promoter and the allottee”

As per the above definition agreement for sale means

an agreement entered into between the promoter and

allottee. This definition does not exclude the

agreements entered into between the promoter and the

allottee prior to the Act came into force. The

definition of the Agreement for sale as mentioned

above will cover both the pre-RERA as well as the

post-RERA agreements. The claim of the complainant

is based on the remedies provided under section 18 of

the Act. In this provision of law it is nowhere

mentioned that it will only cover the agreements as

provided in Section 13(2) of the Act read with rule 8(1)

of the Rules. Meaning thereby the operation of the

provisions of the Act cannot be restricted only to the

post RERA agreements.

That it is now a well-established law that no promoter

can take a deposit or advance without first entering

into agreement for sale. However in the present case

the Respondent not only did not send any Agreement

 for Sale which is normally called the Builder Buyer

Agreement but also took an advance of Rs.

17,95,500.00 even before getting the License in their

favor which as per the records they got on 4.6.2013.

Hence the Respondent was wrong in collecting Rs.

17,95,500.00 before:

1. Getting the license

2. Entering into an Agreement for Sale

3. Accepting a sum much more than 10% which is

permissible as per the RERA Ac, 2016.

26.2.2014 That the Respondent vide their letter dated 26.2.2014

sent us the details of the “ARETE” project reading as

under:

“Arete are extraordinaire park residences located on

Sohna Road, on the foothills of the Aravallis. It has

great connectivity to NH 8 via Rajiv Chowk, NH 2 via

Palwal and the upcoming Kundli Manesar Palwal

(KMP) Expressway……..”

“Arete has been conceptualized by WOW by Warner

Wong, Singapore and DPA, India. The strikingly

beautiful 8 Towers are placed around 3 Acres of

carefully landscaped central greens. The project

would have an iconic, ultra-modern twin level

clubhouse with an infinity edge swimming pool

exclusively for its residents.”

Though the complainant was always doubtful about

the intentions of the Respondent in delivering the

project in time as the booking was made on 8.2.2013

and here after 12 months of the booking the

Respondent sends a letter to all the allottees giving

such a beautiful picture of their project together with

which the Respondent encloses a letter dated 10 th

January from Tata Capital Housing Finance Limited

conveying the approval to the “ILD ARETE

PROJECT”., A copy of the same is enclosed

 herewith as Annexure C/3

A copy of the said letter is enclosed herewith as

Annexure C/2.

6.04.2014 Immediately after the above letter, giving a very rosy

picture of the entire project and its connectivity, the

respondent raised a welcome letter vide letter No.

IA0027 dated 06.04.2014 provisionally allotting a unit

No. B-401 together with which a payment plan was

enclosed, for the first time. The copy of the said

allotment letter is annexed herewith as Annexure

C/4. The most interesting point to note here is

that even after taking a payment of more than

20%, THE

Respondent has still not sent the Flat Buyer

Agreement or which could otherwise be termed as

the Agreement for Sale. The said letter specifically

mentions that “this allotment is subject to terms

& conditions of said application and execution of

Flat Buyers Agreement by you in due course. When

the very allotment is subject to the Flat Buyers

Agreement, than the same should have been sent

with the comfort letter. Unfortunately the Flt

Buyer Agreement was not enclosed with the said

comfort letter The purpose of doing this by the

Builder is twofold”

1. To keep the complainant in dark about the

terms and conditions which the Respondent

desires to place in the Flat Buyers Agreement

2. To somehow delay signing of the same so that the

Respondent gets more time for completion of the

Flats as the time for completion and delivery pof

the flats is mentioned in the Flat Buyers

Agreement and the charges payable for the

Respondent towards the delay in delivery of the

Flat automatically get delayed by virtue of

delaying the signing the Agreement

01.05.2014 Soon after the allotment of the unit in this Project, the

respondent immediately raised demand of Rs.

4,71,731.00 vide a letter dated 01.05.2014 which is

due on allotment and start of excavation of said

project. A copy of the same is enclosed herewith

Annexure C/5. It is worth mentioning here that the

Respondent has still not provided the complainant

with the Flat Buyers Agreement and the reason for

this is yet not known and hence the only reasons for

this kind of a demand without the Flat Buyers

Agreement are as specified above in the paras earlier.

That upon receipt of the demand letter dated

01.05.2014 from the respondent the complainant

himself visited the actual site of construction to see

the development work. However complainant was

shocked to see that nothing was initiated at the site.

The complaint met with the site official and asked

them about the development of the project. In

response the agents and official present at site assures

the complainant that the project will be started soon

 and will be delivered well in time.

23.6.2014 Taking the advantage of the innocence of the

complainant, respondent used his tactics to extort the

money from the complaint by sending the reminders

and by coercing and intimidating the complainant, at

regular intervals through letters dated 23.06.2014, a

copy of which is enclosed herewith as Annexure

C/6.

21.7.2014 A reminder for making the payment was sent again on

21.07.2014 for Rs. 4,71,730.00 and a copy of the

same is enclosed herewith as Annexure C/7

through which the complainant was threatened and

it read as under:

“ We would like to bring to your notice that the timely

payment is the essence of this allotment hence you are

requested hereby to make this payment at the earliest

but not later than 7 days from the receipt of this letter,

failing which we will be forced to take necessary

 recourse, including but not limited to cancellation of

Booking, penal Interest or any other remedy available

as per the terms agreed in the allotment”

The most interesting part to note here is that even

with this letter the Flat Buyers Agreement has not

been sent

Which speaks volumes of the intentions of the

Respondent to keep delaying the signing of the Flat

Buyers Agreement after having accepted the payment

of Rs. 17, 95,500.00 and further asking for a payment

of Rs. 4, 71,730.00

The Respondent states “any other remedy available as

per the terms agreed in the allotment” in thie letter

mentioned above giving a clear indication that he has

no intention of sending the Flat Buyers Agreement.

22.9.2014 The Respondent sent another reminder vide letter

dated 22.9.2014 once again asking for the for Rs.

4,71,730.00 and a copy of the same is enclosed

herewith as Annexure C/7 through which the

complainant was threatened and it read as under:

“ We would like to bring to your notice that the timely

payment is the essence of this allotment hence you are

requested hereby to make this payment at the earliest

but not later than 7 days from the receipt of this letter,

failing which we will be forced to take necessary

recourse, including but not limited to cancellation of

Booking, penal Interest or any other remedy available

as per the terms agreed in the allotment”

The most interesting part to note here is that even

with this letter the Flat Buyers Agreement has not

been sent

Which speaks volumes of the intentions of the

Respondent to keep delaying the signing of the Flat

Buyers Agreement after having accepted the payment

of Rs. 17, 95,500.00 and further asking for a payment

 of Rs. 4, 71,730.00

The Respondent states “any other remedy available

as per the terms agreed in the allotment” in this

letter mentioned above giving a clear indication that

he has no intention of sending the Flat Buyers

Agreement.

3.11.2014 However, on receipt of the said notice, the complaint

visited time and again at the site of the project, but he

was again assured by the officials of the respondent

that project will be started soon and will be delivered

as committed. Thus, left with no option, as the

complaint had already invested a huge amount, the

complaint against the said demand, because of the

threat, paid an amount of Rs. 4,71,730.00 to the

respondent which was acknowledged by the

respondent vide receipt no. 977 dated 03.11.2014. A

copy of the receipt is enclosed herewith as

Annexure C/8.
31.12.2014 The complainant visited the site and the office of the

Respondent very regularly concerned about the

progress at site but unfortunately it was all stand still

and there was a very slow pace of work on the site.

The CRM was visited regularly and kept informed and

the CRM team kept assuring that the pace would pick

up but it did not.

31.12.2014 It would be noticed that the Respondent kept on

reiterating that they would be forced to take necessary

recourse, including but not limited to cancellation” but

they never cancelled as there was no Flat Buyers

Agreement and hence they could never cancel the

same as there was no agreement between the

complainant and the Respondent till now

1.1.2015 On visiting the site, the progress found on the site was

till extremely bad but the false assurances were being

30.6.2015 given by the CRM Department whenever the

complainant went to meet them and met Ms.

Kanupriya Sharma.
30.6.2015 No FBA was received by the complainant even till now

and whenever we met the CRM Team, we were told

 that the FBA would be sent to the complainant

shortly.

This was a clear indication that the intentions of the

Respondent were not clean and the Respondent

wanted to keep gaining time by not getting the FBA

signed for the construction of the flats.

07.07.2015 Subsequent demands were further raised by the

respondent company for Rs. 10, 43,132.00 vide letter

dated 7.7.2015 but the FBA was still not sent by the

Respondent with this demand as well. Since it was a

construction linked plan and therefore the said

demand was to be made after completion of Upper

Basement Roof Slab. The complaint was aware of the

prevalent practice in the construction industry of

collecting money without the corresponding

development on the site and therefore being afraid of

the losing his hard earned money, the complainant

visited the site before making the payment to see the

progress of the project. On visiting the site the

 complainant noticed that the work on the site towards

the completion of Upper Basement was still going on

and lot of construction had to take place before the

completion. Realizing that the construction work on

the site is not corresponding the demand being raised

by the Respondent, the Respondent decided not to

make the payment. The complainant lost the interest

in the project and visited the office of the Respondent

and informed the CRM – Ms. Kanupriya Sharma on

10.7.2015 that they are not interested in buying the

property anymore because of the very slow pace of

work and because of the Respondent delaying the

FBA, which speaks volumes of the bad intentions of

the Respondent in not delivering the project on time as

assured at the time of booking.

23.7.2015 The Respondent raised an intimation letter to

complainant for applicability of Haryana Value Added

Tax (HVAT) on flat Unit No.B 401. The fact is HVAT as

per the law is not payable by the allottee hence the

 complainant now realized that the Respondent was up

to some mischief of collecting certain amounts which

actually are not payable by the complainant.

July 2015 The complainant met the CRM team of the Respondent

and again explained to them personally that the HVAT

is not payable by the allottees as per the Act and

hence it would be illegal to ask this amount from the

complainant. This fact was once again explained to

Ms. Kanupriya Sharma, Deputy Manager of the CRM

Department of the Respondent.

During this meeting again the issue of the FBA was

raised with the team of the Respondent and the

complainant was assured that the same would be sent

to him but it was not sent.

4..8.2015 The Respondent raised a reminder for the payment of

& Rs. 10,53,276.00 and in the reminder letter dated

14.10.2015 14.10.2015 states that “ We would like to bring to

your notice that the timely payment is the essence of

 this allotment hence you are requested hereby to make

this payment at the earliest but not later than 7 days

from the receipt of this letter, failing which we will be

forced to take necessary recourse, including but not

limited to cancellation of Booking, penal Interest or

any other remedy available as per the terms agreed in

the allotment”. However the Respondent never ever

cancelled the booking nor did the Respondent ever

send the FBA nor did the Respondent make a mention

of the FBA in any of the communication since last

more than 31 months in either their mails or their

letters.

The complainant once again visited the office of the

Respondent and met the CRM team member and

asked for the FBA and told in no uncertain terms that

unless the terms of the Agreement are made clear

through a properly signed FBA, the complainant may

not like to make any payment

2.12.2015 The Respondent once again sent an enhanced
 & demand for Rs. 19,09,601.00 which the complainant

29.12.2015 was not interested in paying as this demand was again

not corresponding to the factual work on site and

hence the reluctance on the part of the complainant to

pay this amount.

Apart from this there was no mention of the FBA again

in this communication and therefore the complainant

by now had realized that the Respondent has no

intentions of committing any delivery date and since

he has no intention of committing a delivery date and

his only intention is to collect the money even if it is

not corresponding to the actual work on site, the

complainant was too reluctant to pay the instalment

and hence decided not to pay the money at all to the

Respondent.
1.3.2016 The complainant once again sent a third reminder

notice for the payment of Rs. 19,17,919.00 wherein

the Respondent stated that “that “ We would like to

bring to your notice that the timely payment is the

essence of this allotment hence you are requested

hereby to make this payment at the earliest but not

later than 7 days from the receipt of this letter, failing

which we will be forced to take necessary recourse,

including but not limited to cancellation of Booking,

penal Interest or any other remedy available as per the

terms agreed in the allotment”. However the

Respondent never ever cancelled the booking nor did

the Respondent ever send the FBA nor did the

Respondent make a mention of the FBA in any of the

communication since last more than 36 months in

either their mails or their letters.

The complainant once again visited the office of the

Respondent and met the CRM team member and

asked for the FBA and told in no uncertain terms that

unless the terms of the Agreement are made clear

through a properly signed FBA, the complainant may

not like to make any payment

8.4.2016 The complainant once again sent a fourth reminder

notice for the payment of Rs. 21,32,288.00 which

included the interest of Rs. 2,14,369.00 wherein the

Respondent stated that “that “ We would like to bring

to your notice that the timely payment is the essence

of this allotment hence you are requested hereby to

make this payment at the earliest but not later than 7

days from the receipt of this letter, failing which we

will be forced to take necessary recourse, including

but not limited to cancellation of Booking, penal

Interest or any other remedy available as per the terms

agreed in the allotment”. However the Respondent

never ever cancelled the booking nor did the

Respondent ever send the FBA nor did the Respondent

make a mention of the FBA in any of the

communication since last more than 37 months in

either their mails or their letters.

The complainant once again visited the office of the

Respondent and met the CRM team member and

 asked for the FBA and told in no uncertain terms that

unless the terms of the Agreement are made clear

through a properly signed FBA, the complainant may

not like to make any payment

10.4.2016 The complainant sent another communication dated

10.4.2016 marked as Final reminder and now

demanding a sum of Rs. 27,86,391.00 and an interest

of Rs. 2,92,334.00 which made a total of Rs.

30,78,725.00 without making a mention of the

particular milestone having been achieved. As per the

payment plan attached with the allotment letter dated

6.8.2014 this additional amount of Rs. 8,31,743.75

added in this reminder was due on completion of 4 th

floor roof slab or 90 days from the completion of UB

slab, whichever is later but the demand letter dated

10th April 2016 makes no such mention on the

completion of the milestone.

Furthermore the letter again states that “We would

like to bring to your notice that the timely payment is

the essence of this allotment hence you are requested

hereby to make this payment at the earliest but not

later than 7 days from the receipt of this letter, failing

which we will be forced to take necessary recourse,

including but not limited to cancellation of Booking,

penal Interest or any other remedy available as per the

terms agreed in the allotment”. However the

Respondent never ever cancelled the booking nor did

the Respondent ever send the FBA nor did the

Respondent make a mention of the FBA in any of the

communication since last more than 37 months in

either their mails or their letters.

The complainant once again visited the office of the

Respondent and met the CRM team member and

asked for the FBA and told in no uncertain terms that

unless the terms of the Agreement are made clear

through a properly signed FBA, the complainant may

not like to make any payment.

 It is worth mentioning here that though the

Respondent is repeatedly sending mails and letters

but at no stage is referring to the FBA or sending the

FBA.

April 2016 The reality on ground is that the work has not been

completed up to the 4th floor slab

26.4.2016 The complainant through this letter dated 26..4.2016

again raised a demand for additional sum of Rs.

8,31,743.00 asking for a sum of Rs. 27,78,073.00

which is less than the demand raised earlier of Rs.

30,78,725.00.

13.6.2016 The complainant through this letter dated 13.6.2016

again sent a reminder asking for Rs. 30,82,848.00

being sum total of Rs. 26,86,391.00 and the interest of

Rs. 1,96,457.00

Furthermore the letter again states that “We would

like to bring to your notice that the timely payment is

the essence of this allotment hence you are requested

hereby to make this payment at the earliest but not

later than 7 days from the receipt of this letter, failing

which we will be forced to take necessary recourse,

including but not limited to cancellation of Booking,

penal Interest or any other remedy available as per the

terms agreed in the allotment”. However the

Respondent never ever cancelled the booking nor did

the Respondent ever send the FBA nor did the

Respondent make a mention of the FBA in any of the

communication since last more than 37 months in

either their mails or their letters.

The complainant once again visited the office of the

Respondent and met the CRM team member and

asked for the FBA and told in no uncertain terms that

unless the terms of the Agreement are made clear

through a properly signed FBA, the complainant may

not like to make any payment.

It is worth mentioning here that though the

Respondent is repeatedly sending mails and letters

 but at no stage is referring to the FBA or sending the

FBA.

30.8.2016 The Respondent, in order to lure the complainant,

though not meeting the milestones for collecting the

money, sent an intimation letter dated 30.8.2016 to

the complainant for opportunity to avail 100% waiver

on due interest before the festival season

3.11.2016 The complainant did get lured for some time to go

ahead with the flat but having seen the ground reality

was absolutely shocked that the development on the

site was extremely bad and the labor force working on

the site was also too little.

1.12.2016 The complainant visited the office and submitted the

letter stating that he is not interested in the flat

anymore for the following reasons.

1. No flat buyer Agreement has been provided to

him even after a lapse of three years.

2. The development on the site is too poor compared

to the amount paid and being demanded by the

 Respondent.

3. The intentions of the Developer do not look to be

good in delivering the project in time.

4. The Respondent in none of his communications

has made a reference to the FBA even once.

5. There was a restlessness amongst the other

buyers

The complainant asked for a receipt for the letter

but the same was denied to him.

This itself spoke volumes of the intentions of the

Respondent.
11.12.2016 That in spite of the complainant having told the CRM

team verbally and in writing that he is not interested

in purchase of the flat and that the entire amount of

money paid by the complainant should be returned to

him still the Respondent kept on sending the demand

letters and raised another demand through their letter

dated 1.12.2016 received by the Respondent on

11.12.2016 for a sum of Rs. 42,09,914.00 which

 included interest of Rs. 5,53,783.00

16.12.2016 The complainant was receiving the demands through e

mails and one such reminder was received through an

e mail dated 2.12.2016 of Shri Sunder Gupta of Team

CRM of the Respondent and hence the Respondent on

16.12.2016 visited the office of the Respondent and

submitted one more copy of the letter dated

1.12.2016 through which the complainant had in

writing expressed his desire of not being interested in

buying the property for the reasons explained in the

said letter.

1.5.2017 The Respondent kept on raising the demands from

12.5.2017 time after regular intervals completely ignoring the

request of the complainant that he is not interested in

buying the flat.

It is an admitted position from the facts elaborated

above that the Respondent did not send the FBA nor

did the Respondent make a mention of the FBA till

date.

It is also admitted fact that despite the complainant

having made no payment after 3.11.2014 to the

Respondent, the allotment was never cancelled on

account of nonpayment of the further instalments this

despite the Respondent repeatedly stating in their

communication that ““We would like to bring to your

notice that the timely payment is the essence of this

allotment hence you are requested hereby to make this

payment at the earliest but not later than 7 days from

the receipt of this letter, failing which we will be forced

to take necessary recourse, including but not limited

to cancellation of Booking, penal Interest or any other

remedy available as per the terms agreed in the

allotment”.

However the Respondent never ever cancelled the

booking nor did the Respondent ever send the FBA nor

did the Respondent make a mention of the FBA in any

 of the communications which he wrote to the

complainant number more than 30 since last more

than 51 months in either their mails or their letters.

17.8.2017 On 187.8.2017, almost nine months after the

complainant submitted in writing for the refund of the

money, the Respondent sent an e mail to the

complainant which is enclosed as Annexure C/….

Reading as under:

“ This is to inform you that, we have sent you the

Builder buyer Agreement (BBA) copies dated

10.10.2014 but you did not return the agreement back

to us yet. Please provide the agreement copies for

further process at our end.”

The statement made in this mail of having sent the

BBA on 10.10.2014 is absolutely false, fabricated, and

frivolous with the sole intention of misrepresenting the

facts. The fact is that in spite of having written so

 communications to the complainant by the

Respondent during the period February 2013 till

August 2017, the Respondent has never made a

mention of the BBA in their communication.

October The Haryana Real Estate (Regulation and

2017 Development) Rules, 2017 came into force on

28.7.2017 and the complainant noticed that the

Respondent did not register the project in 2017 and

hence this also spoke volumes on the sincerity of the

Respondent which supported the decision of the

complainant in not going ahead with the purchase of

the flat in this project.

2017 The complainant visited the office of the Respondent

many times and pursued the refund with the

Respondent but they never responded6* or gave any

refund and only kept on asking money from the

complainant
October That the complainant did not get any communication

2017 till from the Respondent on the Registration of the project

December with RERA. What to make a mention of the

 2017 Registration with RERA, the Respondent did not

intimate about having filed the application for

Registration with RERA, which is mandatory as per

RERA, 2016.
2018 In the meantime a group of the buyers of flats at Arete

complex who were worried and unsure about the flats

being given to them started getting together and

exchanging views over the e mails.

Year 2018 The Respondent did not communicate with the

complainant at all and did not refund the amount with

interest due to the complainant but for a

communication to a group of buyers,

8.11.2018 On 8.11.2018 Ms Madhuri Wadhwa, Manager CRP

to 9.3.2020 sent a mail to the customers and in turn the

representative of the Group Mr. Pawan Pandey

responded to the said mail enquring about the status

of the project but unfortunately there was no response

from the Respondent and copies of the 12 pages of the

e mails is attached herewith as Annexure C/… (colly).

The communication is self-explanatory and speak

volumes of the frustration of the buyers of the flats at

 Arete complex.

18.3.2019 The Respondent sent intimation letter dated 18.3.2019

to inform the complainant that the complaint has been

registered with HRERA, Gurugram vide RERA

Registration No.

RC/REP/HRERA/GGM/312/44/2019
April 2019 The complainant understands that the Registration

with HRERA, Gurugram is for 9.79 acres only against

a total licensed area of 11.6125 Acres and that the

delivery so assured in this registration is 2.7.2022

March This itself goes to prove that the project is far from

2020 complete even as on date as the delivery assured in

the RERA Registration is 2.7.2022. It has been

repeatedly submitted by the complainant that the

demands being raised were not corresponding to the

actual construction on site hence the reluctance by

the complainant to go ahead with the purchase of the

flat and not to make the payments Hence the

construction was never proportionate to the demand

when examined in the light of the payment already

 made by the complainant by that time and the

payment schedule agreed between the parties. Be that

as it may be, since the terms and conditions contained

in the format of the flat buyers agreement were not

incorporated in the application submitted by the

complainant nor were the same incorporated in the

letter of allotment issued to the complainant, the

Respondent than could not have insisted upon

retaining the said terms and conditions and since

those conditions were never incorporated in the Flat

Buyers Agreement and no Flat Buyers Agreement has

een signed between the parties, the entire amount

paid by the complainant ought to have been refunded

by the Respondent to the complainant. Since the

Respondent had also utilized the money received from

the complainant, the Responded out to pay the

suitable interest on that amount as well. refunded, the

entire
March The Respondent has inordinately delayed the project

2020 and there has been a great negligence and harassment

 on the part of the Respondent. The payment was

stopped later on as there was no progress on the

construction site aparet from the fact that the Flat

Buyer Agreement was never sent to the complainant

for signatures.
March The complainant after losing all the hope from the

2020 Respondent Company, having their dreams shattered

of owning an Apartment & having basic necessary

facilities in the vicinity of the ‘ARETE’ Project and also

losing considerable amount, are constrained to

approach this Hon’ble Authority for redressal of their

grievance.The project has been delayed by more than

18 months and is likely to be completed only by July

2022 hence the total delay by the time one gets the flat

would be more than 49 months. Hence in such

circumstances there should be no question of

forfeiting any earnest money as the sole responsibility

of delaying the project is of the Respondent and

therefore the complainant seeks refund under

compelling circumstances.
 Hence, the present complaint.

COMPLAINANT

THROUGH
KOHLI & KOHLI LAW ASSOCIATES
COUNSEL(S) FOR THE COMPLAINANT
V 3/11, DLF PHASE III, GURUGRAM,
HARYANA

ADVOCATE KULDEEP KUMAR KOHLI

+91-8860332404
Kuldeep.kohli55@gmail.com;
forkuldeepkohli@gmail.com

ADVOCATE KREETI CHHABRA

P/6584/2019
+919896613598
kreeti.chhabra.kc@gmail.com

DATED:04.02.2020
PLACE: GURUGRAM, HARYANA