Dispute over Compensation: BPTP Limited vs. Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun

A heated battle unfolds between BPTP Limited and Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun over delayed possession and rightful compensation #RealEstateDispute #CompensationBattle

Dispute over Compensation: BPTP Limited vs. Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun
Dispute over Compensation: BPTP Limited vs. Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun

A recent case before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal has brought attention to the ongoing disputes between developers and allottees in the real estate sector. The case, Appeal No.150 of 2022, involves M/s BPTP Limited, a prominent real estate developer, and Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun, two individuals who booked an office space in one of BPTP's projects. The main point of contention revolves around the delay in possession and the subsequent compensation granted to the allottees.

Background:

Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun initially booked an office space in BPTP Park Central, located in Sector 85, Faridabad, by making a payment of Rs.3,07,725/-. Despite paying 95% of the total amount, the possession of the unit was not delivered as per the agreed-upon timeline. BPTP Limited offered an alternative unit at a different location, which the Devguns refused to accept. Furthermore, BPTP Limited collected enhanced External Development Charges (EDC) despite a stay order from the High Court. Frustrated by the delay, Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun filed a complaint with the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, seeking various reliefs, including compensation and a refund.

The Settlement and Subsequent Complaint:

Eventually, the parties reached a settlement on 4th February 2019, wherein the Devguns agreed to withdraw their earlier complaint and accept an alternative unit in another project, Park Elite Floors, Faridabad. However, BPTP Limited failed to deliver possession of the alternative unit within the agreed-upon timeframe. As a result, the Devguns filed a fresh complaint before the Authority, seeking compensation, refund, and other damages.

The Adjudicating Officer's Decision:

After considering the arguments from both sides, the learned Adjudicating Officer granted compensation to Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun for the period of delay. The compensation was calculated at the rate of 6% per annum on the amount deposited by the Devguns with BPTP Limited. The total compensation awarded amounted to Rs.4,31,918/-. The Adjudicating Officer also directed BPTP Limited to pay the amount within a specified timeline, along with litigation costs.

The Appeal:

Feeling aggrieved by the decision, BPTP Limited appealed the case before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal. BPTP Limited argued that Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun had previously agreed not to raise any claims against the company regarding the previous unit. Hence, they contended that the compensation granted for the period prior to the settlement was unwarranted.

Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun, on the other hand, asserted that BPTP Limited had violated the terms of the settlement by failing to deliver possession of the alternative unit within the specified timeframe. Therefore, they argued that the compensation awarded by the Adjudicating Officer was justified.

Current Status:

As the case is still pending before the Haryana Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, a final decision has not been reached. The Tribunal will carefully consider the arguments presented by both parties and evaluate the legality and fairness of the compensation awarded by the Adjudicating Officer.

Conclusion:

The case between BPTP Limited and Mr. Bhupesh Devgun and Mrs. Ritu Devgun highlights the persistent challenges faced by allottees in the real estate sector. Delayed possession and disputes over compensation continue to be major issues. The outcome of this case will have significant implications for both developers and allottees, as it will help establish precedents and guidelines for future disputes.

Note: The information provided in this article about Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) is for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal or professional advice and readers should consult qualified professionals for advice specific to their circumstances. The information provided in this article is based on the Appeal No.150 of 2022 before the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority

We hope you found our blog insightful and engaging! We appreciate your time and interest. If you enjoyed reading it, don't forget to subscribe to our newsletter to receive regular updates on our latest content. Visit our website www.reunionhq.in to know more.