Advertisement
When should a housing society in Mumbai start considering re...
From GST on JDAs to SEBI’s REIT reclassification and the S...
Stay ahead in the world of real estate with our daily podcas...
Stay ahead in the world of real estate with our daily podcas...
The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRera) recently dismissed several complaints from homebuyers, citing lack of jurisdiction or noting that statutory remedies had already been provided. Cases included disputes over maintenance deposits and delayed possession claims. HRera clarified that disputes arising from private agreements between buyers and third parties fall outside its remit. It also emphasized that allottees who continue with projects after earlier compensation orders, such as interest for delay under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, are generally not entitled to additional claims for the same cause.
The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRera) has recently dismissed a number of homebuyer complaints after determining either a lack of jurisdiction or that remedies had already been granted through previous orders. The rulings reflect HRera's focus on enforcing the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, while avoiding redundant compensation for issues already addressed. Advertisement
In one instance, Anju Rani, a resident of Ardee City, requested the return of an INR 75,000 maintenance security deposit paid during a resale transaction. HRera observed that the dispute arose from a private agreement between two parties and did not involve a promoter allottee relationship under the 2016 RERA Act. The bench noted that the maintenance agency was not classified as a promoter under the Act, and therefore, the matter fell outside HRera's jurisdiction.
Another case involved a Gurgaon homebuyer seeking over INR 53 lakh as additional compensation for delayed possession in the Ansal Highland Park project in Sector 103. The complainant sought damages for mental stress, rental losses, and litigation expenses. HRera referred to its earlier order directing the developer, Identity Build-tech, to pay interest at 9.3% per annum for delay from April 2017 until possession was offered. Since the allottees had opted to continue with the project, the authority ruled that no further compensation could be granted for the same delay-related issue.
Similar rulings were applied to complaints against IREO concerning delayed possession in IREO City (Sector 60) and IREO Victory Valley (Sector 67), both in Gurgaon. HRera emphasized that interest payments for delays including earlier orders granting up to 10.4% per annum had already been made to allottees who remained invested in the projects. Therefore, additional claims for the same cause were not considered valid.
Across these cases, HRera highlighted the distinction between statutory remedies available under RERA and private civil disputes. The authority clarified that disputes not involving promoter allottee relationships, or claims seeking repeated compensation for issues already addressed, are outside its jurisdiction. All dismissed cases have now been formally closed.
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
