M/S Alpha Corp Development Private LTD. vs. Vibha Gandhi

Facts

The appellant, M/s Alpha Corp. Development Private Limited, filed an appeal against an order dated 01.02.2021 passed by the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal had remanded the matter to the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (Authority), directing the appellant to hand over possession of a flat to the respondent-allottee, Vibha Gandhi, upon deposit of Rs. 2,00,000/-, with the final settlement of accounts to be determined later. The respondent had filed a complaint seeking possession of the flat and interest on delayed possession. The Authority had initially decided the matter ex parte on 10.12.2019, directing the appellant to pay delayed possession charges and allowing the complainant to take possession after making requisite payments. The appellant challenged this order before the Tribunal, arguing it was wrongly decided ex parte. The Tribunal allowed the appeal and remanded the matter.

Held

The High Court modified the order of the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 01.02.2021. The Court directed that in case the respondent deposits an additional sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- within one week, peaceful possession of the apartment shall be handed over to her within two weeks thereafter, in line with the Tribunal's original direction. The Court acknowledged the appellant's contention regarding the substantial outstanding amount and the respondent's willingness to deposit further sums as per the final adjudication. The appeal was disposed of with this modification, leaving the final settlement of accounts subject to the ongoing proceedings before the Authority. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, but the final determination of the total outstanding amount and its implications on the possession remains with the Authority.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal erred in remanding the matter to the Authority with a direction to hand over possession of the flat to the respondent-allottee upon a partial deposit, contrary to the substantial outstanding amount claimed by the appellant, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and the terms of the apartment buyer's agreement? Petitioner's Arguments: The appellant contended that a sum of approximately Rs. 18,74,000/- was outstanding from the respondent, and it was unjust to direct the handing over of possession without complete payment. They relied on their initial offer to hand over possession upon deposit of Rs. 5 lakh and surety for the rest. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent argued that the total cost of the flat was Rs. 45,99,629/-, out of which Rs. 43,17,465/- had been deposited, along with an additional Rs. 2,00,000/- pursuant to the Tribunal's order. They questioned the escalation of the outstanding amount from Rs. 7,28,099/- to Rs. 18,74,327/- and sought immediate possession. They also stated their willingness to deposit any amount determined by the Authority.