words per minute
7
Himani1864556
00:00
Speed
This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
AFR
Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 13904 of 2020
Petitioner :- Vibhor Vaibhav Infrahomes Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent :- Union Of India And 5 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Swapnil Rastogi
Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,C.S.C.,Vinay Kumar Pathak,Wasim Masood
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Siddhartha Singhal, holding brief of Sri Swapnil Rastogi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vinay Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for Respondent No.1, Girish Vishvakarma, learned standing counsel for Respondent No.2 and Sri Jagdish Prasad holding brief of Sri Wasim Masood, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following reliefs:
"(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned order dated 30.09.2019 passed by Adjudicating Officer, Regional Office, Uttar Pradesh, Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Gautambudh Nagar in Complaint Case No. ADJ/120185832 (Sarika Tulsian and another vs. Vibhor Vaibhav Infrahome Pvt. Ltd.) (Annexure No. 1);
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records and quashing the impugned recovery certificate dated 25.06.2020 issued by Adjudicating Officer, Regional Office, Uttar Pradesh, Real Estate Regulatory, Gautambudh Nagar (Annexure No. 2);
(c) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring the proviso to Section 43(5) of Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016 as arbitrary, ultra vires to the constitution being in conflict and contradictory to the spirit of the Real Estate (Regulation & Development) Act, 2016."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner is not pressing the relief no.'c'.
Facts
4. Briefly stated facts of the present case are that the petitioner is the promoter within the meaning of Section 2(zk) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 2016"). The petitioner entered into builder-buyer agreement dated 10.07.2011 with the respondent nos. 5 and 6. Undisputedly as per agreement the petitioner was under a contractual obligation to handover the flat to the respondent nos.5 and 6 within 30 months from the date of agreement. A grace period of 180 days was also provided in the agreement. Thus as per agreement the petitioner was liable to handover the flat complete in all respect to the respondent nos.5 and 6 within 30 + 6 = 36 months i.e. three years. Thus, the last date for giving possession of the flat by the petitioner to the respondent nos.5 and 6 was 09.07.2014. However, the petitioner could not complete and handover the flat to the respondent nos.5 and 6 within the agreed time and thus violated provisions of Section 18 of the Act, 2016. The actual possession of the flat was received by the respondent nos. 5 and 6 on 26.12.2017. Since the petitioner violated the provisions of Section 18 of the Act, 2016, therefore, the respondent nos.5 and 6 filed an application on 18.01.2018 before the authority as defined in Section 2(i) of the Act, 2016 claiming compensation and interest. Since the respondent nos.5 and 6 have claimed compensation also, therefore, the authority passed an order dated 22.05.2019 holding that the Adjudicating Officer may be approached in this regard. Thus, the matter came before the Adjudicating Officer under Section 71 of the Act, 2016. The Adjudicating Officer passed the impugned order dated 30.09.2019 awarding compensation and interest. Aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned order, the petitioner has filed present writ petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India.