G.R. Reddy JUDGMENT
G.R. Reddy, Member
This complaint is filed under Sec. 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 before this Authority against the project SHRIRAM SUMMITT praying for a direction to pay Delay Period Interest.
BRIEF FACTS OF THE COMPLAINT ARE AS UNDER:-
1. The Complainant has entered into an agreement of sale with the Respondents on 26.05.2018 for purchase of an apartments. The project completion date as per agreement was 31.12.2019. The complainant has paid an amount of Rs. 41,64,506/- (Rupees Forty-one lakhs sixty four thousand five hundred six only) to the respondent till the date of complaint. Since there was delay of more than three years in handing over the apartment, the complainant has filed the above complaint before the Authority praying for a Direction to the Respondents to pay Delay Period Interest.
2. On a perusal of the sale agreement, it is seen that the completion date is agreed as 31.12.2019. The promoter-respondent was required to complete the project and hand over possession of the apartment by 31.12.2019. In cases where the respondent-promoter has failed to complete or unable to handover the possession of the apartment to the allottee, the Allottee has a right to file a complaint before the Authority and hence this complaint is admissible for relief in accordance with Section 18 of the Act.
3. After registration of the complaint, notice was issued by the Authority to both complainant and the Respondents to appear before the Authority. In pursuance of the notice, issued by the Authority, the Complainant has appeared in person and the respondents have appeared before the Authority through their counsel and authorised representative, filed statement of objections. During the course of hearing, the Complainants have filed an application dated 15.02.2023 to amend their prayer from "Delay Compensation" to "delay period Interest". The Respondent in its statement of objection contended that the project has not been completed within stipulated time due to force majeure events such as scarcity of raw materials, non-availability of skilled labours, transport disruption or such reasons beyond the control of the respondent. In addition COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown have also contributed significantly to the obstacles faced by the respondent. The Respondent further submits that the impact of the ruling of the NGT, New Delhi also caused for the delay in completion of the project. The Respondent has stated that the highlight of the NGT order was brought to the notice of K-RERA as well as the allottees/customers through their letters and email. No document is produced by the Respondent in support of their claim of informing K-RERA and Allottees. In support of their defence, the Respondent has submitted various documents like Occupancy Certificate, RERA Registration Certificate, copy of agreement of sale, order passed by the NGT, Copy of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and other documents. The respondent has sought to explain the delay by referring to above issues which are nothing but routine requirements of compliances and construction related issues which are required to be handled by the Promoter of any project who has undertaken to develop the real estate project. None of the reason submitted by the Respondent has any force and legal validity to justify the delay in completion of the project and provide any exception from the application of Section-18 of the Act. Therefore, as per Section 18 of the Act, the promoter is liable pay the delay period interest.
4. One of the contentions raised by the respondent for delay in completing the project is on account of Covid-19. As stated earlier, the delivery and completion of the project is December, 2019 and the actual Covid-19 pandemic started during the year 2020 and the respondent cannot plead before the Authority Covid-19 pandemic as the reason for delay in ........