The judgment established the unconditional right of the allottee to seek refund and the application of promissory estoppel in enforcing promises made by the promoter.

JUDGMENT :

Goutam Bhaduri, J.

Heard.

1. The present appeal is filed under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 2016') whereby the order dated 07/03/2023 passed by the Chhattisgarh Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Raipur, C.G. is under challenge.

2. (I) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the respondent had filed an application before the RERA, Raipur under Section 31 of the Act, 2016 that he was allotted a 2-BHK Duplex Row House bearing House No.C-36A/01 in Section 10 of Kamal Vihar Project, Raipur for an amount of Rs.18,25,000/- on 10/06/2016. The allottee deposited an amount of Rs.18,21,250/- uptill 31/10/2017 but even after four years of filing the application before the RERA, he did not get the possession of the said house. It was further stated that the promoter RDA, by letter dated 27/08/2020 asked the allottee/respondent to deposit an amount of Rs.23,33,963.88/- wherein the GST amount was also shown.

(II) It was the case of the allottee that at the time of purchase of the house though it was stated that it was a tentative price and the actual increase may inflate to 2-3% and demand of GST was not part of the condition but the amount was claimed with an inflated price to the extent of 35% instead of 1-2%. The allottee, therefore, requested to allot the house with an increase of 2% and in alternate requested that he may be allotted a plot in another project known as Indraprastha-2 on the price which was prevailing in the year 2016. It was further stated that if such conditions are not palatable or the RDA was not willing to perform, the entire return of the deposited amount was claimed for.

3. Non-applicant/appellant RDA stated that the allotment of the house was of 10/06/2016 for an amount of Rs.18,25,000/-. Thereafter, because of the increase in material price in the intervening period, by letter dated 27/08/2020 the increased price was asked for. They further stated that the payment of GST was already in the knowledge of the allottee and the increase of price was according to the market rate which was prevailing. It was further stated that they did not have any other plot available for allotment at the prevailing rate of 2016. The delay was attributed for the reason that certain litigation was pending before the National Green Tribunal and the Supreme Court. Thereafter Assembly election followed. Consequently, no development could be carried out in the project and further they stated that till June, 2019 regular development was carried out and they sought for extension of the project time to the State Government. The RDA further stated that if the allottee does not want to purchase the house as per the rules, they are ready to return the amount after the deduction and prays for dismissal of the application.

4. The RERA by order dated 02/01/2021 dismissed the application and held that the increased price would depend on the facts situation of each case and further increase in the price cannot be automatically accepted since there was no agreement executed and it cannot be culled out from the facts that what was the last date for handing over the possession. The learned RERA further observed that according to the declaration filed before the RERA, the project was to be completed by 31/03/2019 and the extension of such time was sought for, which was pending. The RERA further observed that since the allottee failed to deposit the amount he was called upon to deposit by 11/09/2020 and the proceedings were pending before the National Green Tribunal and the Supreme Court from 2013 to 2019 and certain orders were passed as such the delay caused was reasonable and since the allottee himself failed to pay the increased amount, no relief can be granted.

5. Being aggrieved by such order, the allottee preferred an appeal before the C.G. Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Raipur. The appellate Tribunal by its order dated 07/03/2023 which is under challenge herein direct