| Date of Order | Sections Invoked | Complainant & Respondent | Summary of Case | Download |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| X-Y-Z | Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016; Rule 17 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Suman Patra and Tumpa Patra
Respondent: M/s. Evanie lnfrastructure Pvt. Ltd vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning the failure to deliver possession of a booked residential flat. The dispute arose from an Agreement for Sale executed in 2018, which stipulated a clear timeline for handover. The Authority noted that the developer failed to commence construction or provide any definitive date for possession, thereby defaulting on its contractual obligations. After considering the submissions and noting the developer's absence during the hearing, the Authority concluded that a breach of the stipulated timeline had occurred. Consequently, the Authority has ordered the developer to refund the principal amount paid by the complainant, totaling Rs. 7,78,150. Crucially, the refund must also include interest calculated at the State Bank of India (SBI) Prime Lending Rate + 2% per annum. The developer is mandated to transfer the full refund amount via bank transfer within 45 days of receiving the order via email. The complainant has been directed to furnish the necessary bank account details to the developer within three days of the order's receipt. The matter is disposed of with these directions. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Papiya Rakshit
Respondent: Bengal Shrachi Housing Development Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses the procedural requirements for adjudicating a real estate complaint involving a Joint Venture project. The Authority first clarified that since the project involves a Joint Venture, the views of the Housing Board are essential. Consequently, the Housing Board has been formally included as a second respondent. The primary respondent was granted 15 days to file a comprehensive Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit. This response must include a detailed, date-wise account of events, specifically addressing the acquisition of land, the status of any litigation, plan sanction dates, and the project commencement date. The complainant is permitted to file a Rejoinder/Reply to the respondent's comprehensive affidavit within 15 days. Crucially, the Housing Board was also directed to submit its own detailed submission on a Notarized Affidavit within 15 days, responding to the primary respondent's affidavit. The Authority has taken these submissions on record and fixed a date for the next hearing to continue the proceedings. All parties are mandated to submit documents in both hard and soft copies. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, and Rule 17 of the West Bengal Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Rules, 2021. |
Complainant: Sekhar Kumar Sengupta & Saheli Sengupta
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a dispute concerning the cancellation of a real estate project and the failure to deliver a booked flat. The complainant had deposited an advance amount of Rs. 5,35,000 against a total consideration of Rs. 17,40,000. The matter came before the Authority after the developer cancelled the project. While the developer proposed an alternative land settlement, the Authority noted the complainant's insistence on a monetary refund. The Authority found that since the project was cancelled and possession was not delivered, the developer is legally obligated to refund the principal amount paid. The ruling cites Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. Accordingly, the Authority ordered the developer to refund the principal amount of Rs. 5,35,000. Furthermore, the developer must pay interest on this amount at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Rate + 2% per annum. This interest must accrue from the date of the respective payments until the date of final refund. The refund must be completed via bank transfer within 45 days of the Authority's order. The complainant was directed to provide necessary bank account details within three days. The matter is disposed of with these directions. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section (3) of the WBHIRA Act, 2017. |
Complainant: Manika Das
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint regarding the failure to deliver a booked residential flat and the subsequent non-refund of funds. The core dispute involved a booking made for a property that was later transferred to a different project, which ultimately failed to materialize due to land litigation. The Authority found that the developer failed miserably in its obligations. Key violations noted include taking the booking without obtaining mandatory registration under the relevant Real Estate Act (WBHIRA/RERA). Furthermore, the developer failed to commence construction or provide any refund when the project stalled. Based on these findings, the Authority concluded that the developer was legally bound to refund the entire principal amount paid. **The Order Directs:** 1. The developer must refund the principal amount of Rs. 2,09,000. 2. This refund must include interest calculated at SBI Prime Lending Rate + 2% per annum, commencing from the date of the last payment made by the complainant until the final refund date. 3. The refund must be completed via bank transfer within 45 days of the receipt of this order. The matter is disposed of with these mandatory directions. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Bani Dasgupta
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This West Bengal RERA order addresses a dispute concerning the purchase of a residential flat. The core complaint revolves around the failure to complete a booked project and the subsequent delay in a shifted booking to a second development. The petitioner claimed a refund of the initial payment amount, along with substantial compensation, interest, and litigation costs. After hearing both sides, the Authority admitted the matter for further proceedings and issued detailed procedural directions. The key directives mandate that the petitioner submit a comprehensive written submission via notarized affidavit within ten days. Similarly, the respondent must file a detailed written response, annexing supporting documents, and must specifically disclose the current status and HIRA registration details for both projects involved in the dispute. The petitioner is also permitted to file a rejoinder. Furthermore, the Authority noted that both parties remain at liberty to reach a mutual settlement, which, if achieved, must be formalized through a Joint Affidavit. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 28.03.2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Sanjoy Saha & Respondent: Simoco Systems & Infrastructure Solutions Limited vs WBRERA |
The Authority admitted the complaint, which centers on the failure to deliver possession of a flat within the stipulated timeframe following the execution of an Agreement for Sale. The complainant seeks the refund of funds paid, along with interest, due to the delay. The respondent countered by stating that compensation, as per the agreement, would be provided only after physical possession is taken. After hearing both parties, the Authority issued procedural directions to facilitate the matter's progress. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed written submission on a notarized affidavit within 30 days, specifically detailing all payments made (including receipt/voucher numbers) and annexing all supporting documents. The respondent must submit a comprehensive written response on a notarized affidavit within 30 days. Crucially, the respondent must annex the project's Completion Certificate, along with details regarding the project's completion date, land area, and registration details. The complainant is further directed to file a reply or rejoinder within 15 days of receiving the respondent's affidavit. The matter is fixed for further online hearing and order. | |
| X-Y-Z | Section 63 of the WBRERA Act, 2016. |
Complainant: Snehangsu Kumar Nag & Respondent: Soumita Construction Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning the failure to deliver possession of a booked residential flat. The Authority examined the documentary evidence, confirming that the complainant paid a total sum of Rs. 16,91,389/- and executed an Agreement for Sale. The Authority found serious breaches on the part of the developer, concluding that the company failed to fulfill its contractual obligations to complete the project and provide possession within the agreed timeline. Consequently, the Authority has mandated the following relief: 1. **Refund of Principal:** The developer must refund the entire principal amount of Rs. 16,91,389/- by bank transfer within 45 days of the order's communication. 2. **Refund of Interest:** The developer must also pay interest in two parts: (a) at the rate agreed upon in the Sale Agreement (from the date of payment to May 31, 2018); and (b) at the rate of SBI Prime lending rate plus 2% (from June 1, 2018, until the final refund date). The interest payment must be completed within four months. The order warns that failure to comply will attract penal provisions under the WBRERA Act, 2016. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Paras Nath
Respondent: MKHS Realty LLP vs WBRERA |
This order was passed during an online hearing, noting the absence of the Complainant. The primary administrative action was the acceptance of the Respondent’s updated address and email ID, directing that all future official communications be routed to these new details. The Authority issued comprehensive procedural directions to facilitate the continuation of the complaint. The Complainant was granted a final opportunity to file a Notarized Affidavit containing their complete written submission, along with supporting documents, within ten days. They are also directed to immediately send a signed copy of the Complaint Petition to the Respondent’s new address. The Respondent is mandated to submit their Notarized Affidavit, adhering to the previous order’s requirements, within ten days of receiving the Complainant’s affidavit. Furthermore, the Complainant retains the right to file a Rejoinder on a Notarized Affidavit within ten days of receiving the Respondent’s written response. The Authority confirmed it will forward copies of the Complaint Petition and the last order to the Respondent’s updated contact information. The next online hearing date was fixed for 23.05.2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Paras Nath
Respondent: MKHS Realty LLP vs WBRERA |
The Authority held an online hearing concerning a complaint regarding the booking of a flat in a real estate project. The complainant submitted that they paid a total consideration amount and executed an Agreement for Sale, but the project construction has stalled. Consequently, the complainant sought a full refund of the amount paid. The Authority noted the absence of the respondent, despite due service notices being issued. After hearing the complainant, the Authority admitted the matter for further proceedings. The order issued mandates specific procedural steps: 1. The complainant is directed to submit their detailed submission on a Notarized Affidavit, along with supporting documents, within seven days. 2. The respondent is directed to file a Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit, with supporting documents, within seven days. 3. The complainant must then submit a Reply/Rejoinder on a Notarized Affidavit within seven days of receiving the respondent's affidavit. The Authority warned that failure by the respondent to submit a response or appear may lead to the matter being heard ex-parte. The next date for the online hearing is fixed for 10.04.2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | The complaint invokes provisions related to delay in possession and remedies for refund/compensation under the RERA Act, 2016. |
Complainant: Anil Agarwal & Respondent: Ideal Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning the failure to deliver possession of a residential flat booked in 2014. The complainant alleged that despite executing an Agreement for Sale for a consideration of over Rs. 4 crores, the developer failed to hand over the flat by the scheduled date of June 2016. The complainant further claimed that the developer had subsequently sold the property to a third party, with the conveyance deed registered in 2021. Consequently, the complainant sought the refund of the paid amount (Rs. 3.07 crores) along with interest at 12% per annum. The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing. The order establishes a clear procedural roadmap: 1. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed submission on a Notarized Affidavit within seven days. 2. The developer must submit a Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit within seven days of receiving the complainant's affidavit. 3. The complainant must then submit a Rejoinder, if necessary, within seven days of receiving the developer's response. The developer is warned to appear on the next hearing date (March 30, 2023), failing which the Authority may proceed ex-parte. | |
| X-Y-Z | The complaint primarily invokes the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), specifically concerning the developer's obligation regarding timely possession and adherence to the stipulated timeline (e.g., Section 18/22 p |
Complainant: Anil Agarwal & Respondent: Riverbank Developers Private Limited vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint regarding the failure to hand over possession of two residential flats, which were allotted in 2014. The complainant alleges that possession was due by June 2018, but the property remains undelivered. The complainant has paid a total sum of Rs. 70,54,034/- and seeks a refund of the principal amount along with interest at 18% per annum. The respondent, however, raised a preliminary defense, noting that a similar complaint is already pending before the Consumer Forum. After hearing both parties, the Authority admitted the matter for further proceedings. The order mandates a structured exchange of affidavits to establish the facts and the legal maintainability of the complaint. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed submission on a Notarized Affidavit, specifically addressing the status of the pending Consumer Forum case. The respondent must file a Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit. Subsequently, the complainant must file a Rejoinder. The Authority has fixed the next hearing date for March 30, 2023, to proceed with the merits of the dispute. | |
| X-Y-Z | Sections 16 (Refund) and 18 (Possession Timeline) of the RERA Act are evoked. The order mandates the refund of the principal amount and interest due to the developer's failure to deliver possession within the stipulated time. |
Complainant: Mrs. Padam Gupta
Respondent: Riverbank Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority order addresses a complaint regarding the failure to deliver possession of a booked flat within the stipulated timeframe. The complainant sought a refund of the principal amount paid, citing considerable delay by the developer. After reviewing the submissions and documents, the Authority concluded that the developer failed in its contractual obligation to hand over possession within the scheduled period. Consequently, the Authority directed the developer to refund the principal amount of Rs. 22,93,746/-. Crucially, the order mandates that the refund must include interest calculated at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Interest + 2% per annum. This interest is payable from the date of each respective payment made by the complainant until the date of the final refund. The developer is directed to complete the refund via bank transfer within 45 days of the order's receipt. The complainant must provide necessary bank details within three days. Furthermore, the complainant is directed to withdraw the matter from the Consumer Forum upon successful completion of the refund. The Authority also reserved the right for the complainant to file an execution application if the developer fails to comply with the stipulated timeline. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Sukanya Mukhopadhyay
Respondent: Evanie Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order was passed by the West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority after proceeding ex-parte, given the absence of the developer. The complaint concerned the failure of the developer to complete and offer possession of a booked residential flat by the agreed-upon date. The complainant submitted evidence detailing payments made towards the consideration money for the property. The Authority, after examining the affidavit and documents, found the developer liable for non-fulfillment of contractual obligations. Consequently, the Authority has ordered the developer to refund the balance amount of Rs. 8,41,415/-. Furthermore, the developer must pay interest on this amount, calculated at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Rate + 2%, starting from the date of the complainant's payment until the date of refund. The developer is mandated to complete the refund via bank transfer within 45 days of receiving the order via email. The order stipulates that if the developer fails to comply within the stipulated period, the complainant is at liberty to seek execution of the order before the Authority. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Chandana Das
Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a dispute concerning the alleged cancellation of a housing project. The complainant sought the refund of an advance payment of Rs. 6,00,000, made under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for a flat, arguing that possession was never delivered as scheduled. The respondent initially proposed either a partial refund or an alternative flat. After hearing both parties, the Authority admitted the matter for further proceedings and issued specific directions to both sides. The complainant is directed to submit their complete case details via a Notarized Affidavit, along with supporting documents, within 15 days. The respondent must submit a comprehensive Written Response via a Notarized Affidavit. This response must specifically detail the timeline for refunding the paid amount and provide full details of any alternative flats being offered for inspection. This affidavit must be submitted within 15 days of receiving the complainant’s affidavit. The Authority noted that the parties are free to negotiate a settlement regarding an alternative flat and must submit a joint affidavit if an agreement is reached. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on 14.03.2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Chandana Das & Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd vs WBRERA |
This order, passed by the West Bengal Real Estate Regulatory Authority, addresses a complaint regarding the failure to deliver possession of a booked flat within the stipulated timeframe. After hearing both parties and reviewing the submitted affidavits, the Authority found that the respondent failed to comply with its obligations under the Agreement for Sale. Although the respondent offered an alternative flat or land, the Authority noted the complainant's insistence on a monetary refund. Consequently, the Authority ruled that the respondent is legally obligated to refund the principal amount paid (Rs. 6 lakhs minus GST) along with interest. The operative directions mandate that the respondent must remit the refund amount, calculated at the rate of SBI Prime Lending Rate plus 2%, within 45 days of receiving the order via email. The refund must be made via bank transfer. The complainant is directed to provide the necessary bank account details within seven days. Failure to comply within the stipulated period will allow the complainant to file an execution application before the Authority. | |
| X-Y-Z | The complaint primarily invokes the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), specifically concerning the rights of the allottee and the promoter's obligation to refund money upon project cancellation or delay. |
Complainant: Sekhar Kumar Sengupta & Saheli Sengupta & Respondent: Dharitri Infraventure Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint regarding the cancellation of a real estate project after an advance consideration of Rs. 5,35,000 was paid against a total consideration of Rs. 17,40,000. The complainant sought the refund of the deposited amount along with interest, citing the project's cancellation. The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing. The respondent acknowledged the willingness to refund the amount but requested time and proposed an alternative flat. The Authority issued specific directions to both parties: 1. The complainant is directed to submit a comprehensive submission on a Notarized Affidavit, attaching all supporting documents, within ten days. 2. The respondent must submit a detailed written response on a Notarized Affidavit, explicitly stating the timeline for the refund (including interest) and providing full details of the proposed alternative flats. This must be submitted within ten days of receiving the complainant's affidavit. 3. The complainant may submit a rejoinder affidavit within ten days of receiving the respondent's affidavit. Both parties are at liberty to negotiate an amicable settlement, including inspecting alternative properties. Should a settlement be reached, a mutual affidavit detailing all terms must be filed. The matter is fixed for further hearing on March 14, 2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | no section has been evoked. |
Complainant: Bharati Das
Respondent: Maa Batai Construction vs WBRERA |
This order details the procedural directives issued by the Authority following the hearing. The primary focus is on ensuring all submissions are legally compliant and properly documented. The Complainant was directed to submit their initial prayer for inclusion of names and their written submission on a Notarized Affidavit within seven days. The Respondent’s written response was accepted and taken on record. However, the Respondent was further directed to submit a Supplementary Affidavit within seven days. This affidavit must correct procedural errors and, critically, provide detailed explanations regarding three points: (a) why the Agreement for Sale was not registered; (b) why the payment schedule was left blank; and (c) the specific legal provision or clause used to cancel the agreement and transfer the flat to a third party. Finally, the Complainant was mandated to submit a point-wise Reply/Rejoinder to the Respondent’s written response on a Notarized Affidavit within fifteen days. The Authority fixed the next hearing date for further proceedings. | |
| X-Y-Z | The complaint invokes the provisions related to the promoter's obligation for timely completion and possession, seeking remedies for delay and breach of contract under RERA. |
Complainant: Bharati Das and her husband (Asis Das)
Respondent: Sushil Kumar Sharma vs WBRERA |
This West Bengal RERA order addresses a complaint concerning the alleged failure to complete and hand over a flat as per the Agreement for Sale. The Authority noted initial procedural deficiencies, specifically the omission of a joint complainant and the promoter company as a respondent. Consequently, the Authority directed the complainant to submit a supplementary Notarized Affidavit within seven days, incorporating the missing joint complainant and naming the promoter company as a respondent. After admitting the matter, the Authority set out a detailed procedural roadmap. The complainant was directed to submit a comprehensive submission on a Notarized Affidavit, along with supporting documents, within ten days. The respondent was mandated to file a Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit, also within ten days. Crucially, the respondent must annex key documents, including the sanction plan of the additional floor, the completion/occupancy certificate, and records of possession offers. Finally, the complainant was directed to file a Rejoinder Affidavit within ten days of receiving the respondent's reply. The matter was fixed for further hearing and order on a specified date. | |
| X-Y-Z | RERA Act provisions concerning delay in possession and failure to adhere to the stipulated timeline for handover of the residential unit. |
Complainant: Sento Bhusan Kar & Respondent: Bengal Shapoorji Housing Development Pvt. Ltd. vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint concerning the delay in handing over a residential apartment and associated parking space. The complainant booked the property in the specified project, with the scheduled date of possession set for September 2019. Despite the passage of time, the project remains under construction. The complainant claims to have paid a total of Rs. 26,57,400/- and seeks immediate possession of the unit, along with compensation and interest on the paid amount due to the delay. The respondent submitted that they anticipate obtaining the Completion Certificate by March 2023. The Authority admitted the matter for further hearing. The order directs the complainant to submit a detailed written submission on a Notarized Affidavit, along with supporting documents, within 15 days. Crucially, the respondent is directed to file a comprehensive Written Response on a Notarized Affidavit. This affidavit must specifically detail the estimated date for obtaining the Completion Certificate and the subsequent handover of possession to the complainant. The matter is fixed for further hearing on April 25, 2023. | |
| X-Y-Z | The complaint primarily invokes the provisions of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA), particularly concerning the developer's obligation regarding timely possession and completion of the project (Section 11). |
Complainant: Parimal Kanti Datta & Respondent: Sabyasachi Chatterjee vs WBRERA |
This order addresses a complaint regarding the delayed possession and incomplete development of a residential flat. The complainant, who executed an Agreement for Sale in 2013, paid a total sum of Rs. 17,10,000/- and received physical possession in 2015. The core disputes before the Authority include the immediate installation of the building lift, the registration of the flat's title, and the settlement of a remaining outstanding amount. After hearing both parties, the Authority admitted the matter for further proceedings. The order mandates specific compliance steps: 1. The complainant is directed to submit a detailed submission through a Notarized Affidavit, along with supporting documents, within 15 days. 2. The respondent must file a comprehensive Written Response via a Notarized Affidavit within 15 days of receiving the complainant's affidavit. 3. Crucially, the respondent must also confirm the total number of flats in the building and provide documentation regarding the issuance of the Completion Certificate (C.C./O.C.). The matter is fixed for further hearing and order on 21.06.2023. |