Gurgaon: Fourteen years on, Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRera) has directed a developer to pay over Rs 77 lakh as compensation to a couple in a project on Golf Course Road.Even after over three years’ delay, the developer failed to hand over possession of the apartment in the Parsvnath Exotica project in sectors 53-54, abandoning construction for four years and lacking an occupation certificate despite repeated demands.On Tuesday, adjudicating officer Rajender Kumar ordered Parsvnath Hessa Developers to pay Rs 77.6 to DLF II residents Raj Kumar Chawla and Indu Chawla for loss of profit and Rs 50,000 towards litigation costs.Though the possession of the apartment was given on March 23, 2018, Rera said at the time of filing complaint earlier, delay was “already over three years and OC/CC had not been obtained”. Rera upheld allottees’ rights under Section 18(1) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, saying “promoters cannot force endless waits” post-payment. Payments plus 10.85% interest from order date are “due forthwith”, the officer said.On Sept 3, 2012, the couple had booked a 3,390 sq ft flat for Rs 3.4 crore. They paid Rs 1.5 crore, including adjustments from a prior MoU for cancelled shops, with possession due by Jan 3, 2015.Pronouncing the order following a complaint filed under Section 31 of the Act, Rera noted a prior order in a separate complaint and directed refund of Rs 1.5 crore plus 10% interest under Rule 15 of Haryana RERA Rules, 2017, citing Supreme Court precedent in IREO Grace Realtech vs Abhishek Khanna (2021).The Chawlas sought Rs 82.5 lakh for loss of profit, Rs 2.15 crore for lost opportunity, 6% interest on deposits for mental agony and Rs 2.5 lakh cost, citing property price surges — “similar units now are now fetching Rs 4.3-8 crore”, according to recent sale deeds. Kumar awarded Rs 77.6 lakh (50% appreciation on invested sum) for value escalation and profit loss, deeming prior interest as delay compensation. Claims for extra interest (6%) and Rs 1 crore agony were rejected as excessive, while Rs 50,000 costs were granted sans court fees. Parsvnath argued that prior interest covered all losses.
