RAJASTHAN REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY JAIPUR (1)F.15(231)RAJ/RERA/C/2022 Suo Moto through Registrar of Authority ... Complainant VERSUS Satkar Greenfields Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondent (2)Complaint No: RAJ/RERA/C-2020-3804 Saroj Devi Sancheti ... Complainant VERSUS Satkar Greenfields Pvt. Ltd. ... Respondent Present Hon’ble Shri Salvinder Singh Sohata, Member Authority 2. Advocate Shruti Rai present on behalf of Complainant 3. CA.Prateek Rawat present on behalf of Respondent Date of Order: 06.07.2023 ORDER Both cases are having involvement of common fact and similar question of law, therefore, the cases are being disposed of by a common order. The factual matrix of the cases are that the Complainant claims that her deceased husband Shri Suresh Kumar Sancheti Page 1 of 8 Suo Mote F.15(231)RAJ/RERA/C/2021 & Complaint No: RAJ-RERA-C-2020-3804aE deposited funds for purchase of unit in the year 2012 in the project “Satkar Greenfields” proposed to be developed at Khasra No: 69/1, Village Basni Baghela , Pali Road, Tehsil Luni, District Jodhpur for booking of residential unit in the project and a payment up to the tune of Rs.1.14 Crore has been deposited before the Promoter by the end of January, 2013. The Promoter has never “executed the Builder-Buyers Agreement. In this regard satisfactory ‘reply was never given and every time it was convinced to execute lan agreement on later date. The unnecessary delay in execution of the Agreement to Sale by the respondent created doubts and trigged the mind of the deceased husband of the Complainant with regard to concern for the deposited money. Respondent failed to obtain necessary permission/ approvals for development of the project. Mr. Suresh Kumar Sancheti expired on 29.08.2015 and including the Complainant Shweta Bhansali, Sonali Surana and Mohit Sancheti are the legal heirs. All the properties and money invested by the deceased person is succeeded by the aforesaid legal heirs. In the light of the provisions of the RERA Act ‘Satkar Greenfields’ project was mandatory to be registered but the Promoter has registered the project “Aastha Homes” bearing registration No:RAJ/P/2018/663. The said project is not registered Page 2 of 8 Suo Moto F.15(231)RAJ/RERA/C/2021 & Complaint No: RAJ-RERA-C-2020 3804as an ongoing project but it is registered as a new project under CMJAY 2015. The Promoter-respondent malafidely changed the nature and design of luxury residential project, ie. ‘Satkar Greenfields’. The aforesaid project has not taken into shape by careless approach of the respondent. The Complainant issued a legal notice on 22.04.2019 against the Promoter-respondent. Subsequently the respondent approached for settlement before the Complainant and legal heirs of Shri Suresh Kumar Sancheti. A settlement had arrived on 13.06.2019. The Promoter agreed through the aforesaid settlement to refund the amount through cheques. The cheques issued by the Promoter-respondent were returned unpaid with the remarks ‘insufficient fund’, therefore, the complaint was filed to seek refund of Rs.1.14 Crores and imposition of penalty under section 59 of the RERA Act against the Promoter- respondent. It also sought relief to award compensation for deficiency of service and negligence on the part of the Promoter- respondent. A reply was filed by the Promoter-respondent that the Complainant or the deceased Suresh Kumar Sancheti is not the allottee under the provisions of section 2(d) of the Act. It is assured that the Promoter is liable to compensate for the losses caused due Page 3 of 8 Suo Moto F.15(231)RAJ/RERA/C/2021 & Complaint No: RAJ-RERA-C-2020-3804to non fulfilling of the contractual obligations through the settlement dated 13.06.2019. It is categorically mentioned therein that the Complainant having financial disputes with the Promoter are being asked to be resolved through the instant litigation. It is prayed to dismiss the complaint in lack of jurisdiction. With regard to Suo Moto case,