Punjab RERA directs Mohali developer to pay delayed possession interest to New Chandigarh penthouse buyers

According to the complaint, the buyers were allotted a penthouse unit in “Tower Mystic-A” through an allotment-cum-buyer’s agreement executed on January 4, 2023. The total sale consideration for the unit was fixed at ₹1.85 crore, out of which the complainants paid more than ₹76 lakh, including GST

The Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) has directed Omaxe New Chandigarh Developers Pvt Ltd to pay delayed possession interest to two Amritsar residents who booked a penthouse in “The Lake” project at Omaxe New Chandigarh, while rejecting their plea seeking a refund of charges levied on super area.

The complainant represented by their counsel Sartaj Khan filed under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. (HT File)

The complainant represented by their counsel Sartaj Khan filed under Section 31 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.

According to the complaint, the buyers were allotted a penthouse unit in “Tower Mystic-A” through an allotment-cum-buyer’s agreement executed on January 4, 2023. The total sale consideration for the unit was fixed at ₹1.85 crore, out of which the complainants paid more than ₹76 lakh, including GST.

The complainants alleged that Omaxe failed to hand over possession by July 31, 2023, the date mentioned in the agreement. They also challenged the developer’s practice of charging based on super area instead of carpet area, claiming the company had collected excess payment.

Omaxe, however, told the authority that it obtained the occupation certificate for the project in October 2023 and offered possession to the buyers in November 2023. The company argued that the agreement clearly disclosed both carpet area and super area, and that the buyers had accepted the pricing terms when executing the agreement.

At the same time, the authority rejected the challenge to super area charges, observing that the RERA model agreement did not prohibit sales based on super area and that contractual terms voluntarily accepted by both parties remained binding. Referring to the principle of “Pacta Sunt Servanda”—meaning agreements must be honoured—the authority held that the buyers could not later seek a refund of charges clearly mentioned in the agreement.