HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Second Appeal No. 203 of 2019 M/s Eminent Infradevelopers Pvt. Ltd. …Appellant Vs.

Shivaji Radhu …Respondent Advocate : Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, Advocate for the appellant Hon’ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

This Second Appeal is arising out of the judgement rendered by the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, in an Appeal No. 13 of 2019, M/s Eminent Infradevelopers Private Ltd. v. Sri Shivaji Radhu on 23.09.2019, which was arising of the judgement dated 30.04.2019, as passed by the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Dehradun in a Complaint Case No. 93 of 2018, Sri Shivaji Radhu v. M/s Eminent Infra Developers Pvt. Ltd. and as a consequence thereto, the impugned orders under challenge herein, it relates to the liability which has been settled by the learned Tribunal and by the learned Regulatory Authority in relation to the remittance of the amount, as well as the interest payable on it by the developer to the following effect:-

**la;qDr lfpo] gfj}kj :Md+ h fodkl izkf/kdj.k ds fnukda 21-12-2018 ds tkap izfrosnu ls Li’V gS fd vkjksX;e~ ifj;kstuk dk ¶ySV l[a ;k ,l&1&102] tks izFke i{k dks vkofaVr gS] i.w kZ gks pqdk gS ,oa lHkh vko';d lqfo/kkvk sa ls ;qDr gSA nksuksa i{kka s ds e/; fnukda 05-02-2016 dks gq, foØ; gsrq bdjkjukes ds vuqlkj izFke i{k dks bl ¶ySV ij vDVcw j 2016 rd dCtk fn;k tkuk FkkA fdUrq bl ifj;kstuk ,o a ,l&1 Cykd dk i.w kZrk@ vf/kHkkxs izek.k i= l{ke izkf/kdj.k ls izkIr ugh a gksus ds dkj.k mUgsa vHkh rd bl ij dCtk ugha fn;k tk ldk gSA l;a qDr lfpo] ,p0vkj0Mh0,0 ds izfrosnu ls Li’V gS fd vc f}rh; i{k us vkjksX;e~ ifj;kstuk ds Qst&2 dks Drop dj fn;k gS rFkk Qst&1 ds ,l&1 ,oa ,l&2 CykWd i.w kZ gks pqds gSa tcfd Qst&1 ds ,] ch] lh] ts] ds ,oa ,y CykWdks a dks o’kZ 2013 esa gh uxj ,oa xzke fu;kstu foHkkx] mRrjk[k.M ls vf/kHkkxs izek.k i= izkIr gks pqdk gSA vr% ;g vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd f}rh; i{k vjksX;e Qst&1 ifj;kstuk dk i.w kZrk izek.k i=@ vf/kHkkxs izek.k i= vkn's k ikfjr gksus dh frfFk ls 02 ekg esa ,p0vkj0Mh0,0 ls izkIr djds fnukad 31-07-2019 rd ¶ySV la[;k ,l&1&102 dh jftLVªh izFke i{k ds lkFk djsaxs ,o a ml ij mudks dCtk Hkh nxsa sA f}rh; i{k bl ¶ySV ij izFke i{k dks foyEc ls dCtk nsus ds fy, Hkw&lEink ¼fofu;eu ,oa fodkl½ vf/kfu;e] 2016 dh /kkjk 18 rFkk mŸkjk[k.M Hk&w lEink ¼fofu;eu ,oa fodkl½ ¼lkekU;½ fu;ekoyh] 2017 ds fu;e 15 ds vkyksd esa izFke i{k }kjk tek dh xbZ 4130000 :0 dh jkf'k ij uoEcj] 2016 ls ¶ySV ij dCtk nsu s dh frfFk rd dh vof/k gsrq 10-75 izfr'kr okf’kZd C;kt dh nj ls ¼tks lEizfr ,l0ch0vkb0Z dh Highest Marginal cost of Lending rate 8.75% ls 2 izfr'kr vf/kd gS½ mudks vfrfjDr jkf'k ¼Delay penalty dh jkf'k ds :i esa½ nsaxsA f}rh; i{k ;g Hkh lqfuf'pr djaxs s fd ,l&1 CykWd lHkh idz kj dh lqfo/kkvksa ls ;qDr gks ,oa mle sa fy¶V] lh

gSA**

2. The brief facts of the case are :-

A. The property allotted to the complainant by the developer/appellant herein is a Studio Apartment No. S1-102, situated on the first floor, having an area of 610 sq. feet in village Baheri, Rajputana, Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar.

B. The sale consideration, which was transferred by complainant/respondent was Rs. 41,30,000/-.

C. An agreement for allotment was executed on 5.02.2016, which contained a clause 3.3 for execution of the sale deed and hand over possession within three months from the date of allotment, was subject to its extension on account of force majure which in the instant case was extended after including the extended period till Oct.2016 that means sale deed was to be executed within the extended time.

D. The possession was to be handed over by Oct 2016, lest failing which an interest was payable to the complainant as per clause 3 of the Agreement to the home buyer, as per the clause 7.1 of the agreement the developer was to obtain completion certificate/occupancy certificate.

E. The developer/appellant had agreed to pay damages @ Rs. 3/- per sq.

feet per month, on the area of flat till possession is handed over.

F. The responsibility to get the c