The main legal point established is the need for a composite comprehensive order to decide all issues together, emphasizing the enabling powers of the Authority to issue interim orders, directions, impose penalty or interest, and rectify orders.

JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J. - While invoking the powers under Section 58 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as 'the RERA Act, 2016'), the allottee has assailed the correctness of the order passed by the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the HREAT').

2. On 25.05.2022, after hearing the preliminary arguments, the following order was passed:-

'The learned senior counsel representing the appellant, while drawing the attention of the Court to the observations made by the Tribunal at page 69 of the paper-book, contends that the Tribunal, after observing in the following manner, has proceeded to set aside the order dated 10.11.2021 and 16.04.2021:-

'53. At the cost of repetition, it is pertinent to mention that the impugned order dated 10.11.2021 has totally reserved the observations/findings of the learned Authority in its previous order dated 16.03.2021 on the issue of payment of interest for delay in completion of infrastructure works. Such a somersault is not legally permissible. This problem arises as there is a tendency with this Authority to pass the multiple orders to substantially decide the rights of the parties instead of passing a composite order to dispose of the complaint deciding all the issues together. It is well recognized legal requirement that all the issues arising in the lis should be decided together by passing a composite order than in parts. Reference can be made to the Full Bench judgment of Hon'ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in case Prithvi Raj Jhingta & Anr. Versus Gopal Singh & Anr., 2007(3) R.C.R.(Civil) 407'.

He submits that he has no objection if the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Panchkula, is permitted to pass a composite comprehensive order deciding all the issues together in accordance with the views of the Tribunal as well as Full Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court.

Mr. Lokesh Sinhal, Advocate, learned counsel representing the Municipal Corporation, Faridabad, prays for a short accommodation to examine the aforesaid contention and give his response.

List on 30.05.2022, for final disposal, in the urgent list'.

3. The learned counsel representing the parties have been heard at length and they have also filed a written synopsis along with the gist of their respective arguments. The issue which arises for adjudication is 'As to whether it will be appropriate for the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the HRERA') to decide the complaints in a piecemeal manner in the absence of enabling power or mandate under the Act, Rules or the Regulations?' Only the necessary facts are noted herein for the sake of clarity and brevity. In a public auction, the appellant was allotted the plot No. 2 in Sector 41, Faridabad, under the Group Housing Scheme. The appellant deposited a sum of Rs. 20,11,00,000/- which is 25% of the total bid of Rs. 80,40,29,466/- on 14.03.2013. There were as many as six such allottees of the plots. Clause 6 and 7 of the allotment letter reads as under:-

'6. That Municipal Corporation, Faridabad shall only provide a metalled road as approach to this plot, sewage disposal lines, water supply, storm water drainage, street light and electrification. Till such time the above services are not provided by Municipal Corporation, Faridabad you shall make requisite arrangements at your own level.

7. That you shall get the building plans sanctioned from Commissioner, MCF within six months from the date of offer of possession in accordance with applicable Building Rules/approved Zoning Plan and shall start the construction within one year and shall complete the building within 5 years. If you fail to complete the building within the specified period, you shall have to pay the extension fee as determined by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Faridabad considering the unavoidable circumstances submitted by you for delay in construction. In case Commissioner is not satisfied w