| Party Dtls | Self / Adv Name | District | Current Status | Next Date of Hearing | Complaint Dispatched | Complaint Dispatched On | Dispatched Tracking Id | Complaint Dispatched Remarks | First-Hearing/Scrutinized Remarks | View Notice |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ALOK KUMAR V/S BPTP LTD. |
JOEL | GURUGRAM | DISPOSED | NOT REQUIRED | Not Yet | First Hearing | -- |
| S No. | Complaint-ID | Complaint-Type | Status | Next Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | RERA-GRG-5876-2022 | Execution | ONLINE COMPLAINT NOT YET RECEIVED AT OFFICE | NA |
| 2 | RERA-GRG-6554-2022 | Execution | PENDING | 28-Sep-2023 |
| Date of Hearing | Status | Proceedings of the day | Bench | Order | Order Uploaded On |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 26-Apr-2022 | DISPOSED | The following 45 cases are being taken up together as all these belongs to project Park Spacio and the issues are similar in nature. The arguments were heard and matters are taken up individually in respect of the relief sought by the concerned complainants in the respective complaints. NAME OF THE BUILDER M/s BPTP Limited PROJECT NAME: SPACIO APPEARANCE 1 CR/3203/2020 Vijay Kumar Jadhav Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 2 CR/1845/2019 Pavan Datta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 3 CR/5602/2019 Tarun Tuli Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Nilotpal Shyam Sh. Venket Rao 4 CR/2671/2020 Mukesh Agarwal Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 5 CR/2772/2020 Nitin Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Daggar Malhotra Sh. Venket Rao 6 CR/2823/2020 Vivek Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 7 CR/2936/2020 Ila Vashista Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 8 CR/2949/2020 Deeksha Seethapathy Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Shri Sh. Venket Rao 9 CR/3009/2020 Mrs. Shilpa Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 10 CR/3010/2020 Kirti Rathore Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 11 CR/3012/2020 Ankita Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 12 CR/3013/2020 Vishal Rana Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 13 CR/3126/2020 Pawan Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Sukhbir Yadav Sh. Venket Rao 14 CR/3134/2020 Satyanarayan Panda Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 15 CR/3195/2020 Tishar Adesara Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 16 CR/3196/2020 Swati Virmani Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 17 CR/3199/2020 Vaibhav Gupta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 18 CR/3337/2020 Saurabh Gupta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 19 CR/3340/2020 Sushil Kumar Jain Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 20 CR/3346/2020 Deepa Gupta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 21 CR/3350/2020 Badri Prashad Gupta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 22 CR/3376/2020 Vikas Mehta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 23 CR/3377/2020 Vijay Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 24 CR/3378/2020 Sudesh Gupta Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 25 CR/3379/2020 Rajesh Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 26 CR/3380/2020 Deepak Luthra Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 27 CR/3381/2020 Ashish Midhha Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 28 CR/3382/2020 Indu Deshawar Sachdev Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 29 CR/3388/2020 Sudhanshu Singhal Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 30 CR/3389/2020 Shriya Chakraborty Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 31 CR/3394/2020 Ajay Chaturvedi Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 32 CR/3604/2020 Kiran Singh Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 33 CR/3605/2020 Hari Narayan Singh Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 34 CR/3670/2020 Narender Kumar Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Daggar Malhotra Sh. Venket Rao 35 CR/3734/2020 Digvijay Singh Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 36 CR/3844/2020 Alok Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Joel Sh. Venket Rao 37 CR/3845/2020 Rakesh Kumar Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Joel Sh. Venket Rao 38 CR/3886/2020 Ranjeet Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 39 CR/3940/2020 Namrata Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 40 CR/4119/2020 Amit Arora Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Ms. Priyanka Agarwal Sh. Venket Rao 41 CR/4428/2020 Archana Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Joel Sh. Venket Rao 42 CR/6711/2019 Anjali Sachdeva Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Pawan Kumar Ray Sh. Venket Rao 43 CR/285/2020 Deepak Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Amit Jaglan Sh. Venket Rao 44 CR/291/2020 Brijesh Kumar Sharma Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Amit Jaglan Sh. Venket Rao 45 CR/623/2020 Pankaj Pandey and Swati Chandra Vs. M/s BPTP Limited and M/s Countrywide Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Sh. Himanshu Suman Sh. Venket Rao The core issues emanating from them are similar in nature and the complainant (s) in the above referred matters are allottees of the project, namely, Spacio (group housing complex) being developed by the same respondent promoter i.e., BPTP. The terms and conditions of the builder buyer’s agreements that had been executed between the parties inter se are also almost similar. The fulcrum of the issue involved in all these cases pertains to failure on the part of the respondent/promoter to deliver timely possession of the units in question, seeking award for delayed possession charges. In several complaints, the complainants have refuted various charges like increase in super area, cost escalation, STP charges, taxes viz GST and VAT etc, advance maintenance charges, holding charges, PLC etc. Since, common issues with regard to super area, cost escalation, STP charges, electrification charges, taxes viz GST and VAT etc, advance maintenance charges, car parking charges, holding charges, club membership charges, PLC, development location charges and utility connection charges, EDC/IDC charges, fire fighting/power backup charges are involved in all these cases and others pending against the respondent in this project as well as in other projects developed by the respondent, so vide order dated 06.07.2021and 17.08.2021, an expert committee headed by Sh. Manik Sonawane IAS (retired) with Sh. Laxmi Kant Saini CA and Shri R.K. Singh CTP (retired) was constituted and was asked to submit its report on the above mentioned issues. The representatives of the allottees were also associated with the committee. The report was submitted and the same along with annexures was uploaded on the website of the authority. Both the parties were directed to file objections to that report, if any. The complainants did not file any objection and the respondent/ builder sought time to file the same but did not opt for the same despite time given in this regard. The report of the committee was accepted and all the common issues as have been mentioned above are settled in terms of the report of the committee. The delayed possession charges are allowed in individual cases w.e.f. the date of admissibility till offer of possession plus 2 months after obtaining occupation certificate or actual handing over of possession, whichever is earlier. Other reliefs sought by the complainants in above-mentioned complaints, has been duly settled and decided in terms of committee- report. Complaints stand disposed off. Detailed orders will follow. File be consigned to the registry. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 10-May-2022 |
| 22-Apr-2022 | PENDING | Matter is adjourned to 26.04.2022 for pronouncement of Orders. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 06-May-2022 |
| 25-Mar-2022 | PENDING | The report of the High Powered Committee has been received and the same has already been up-loaded on the website of the Authority. It has been stated on behalf of the respondent by Shri Venket Rao Advocate that objections to the report of the above mentioned committee are to be filed and the same could not be filed due to lack of annexures with the report. Let the annexures of the report be also uploaded on the website of the authority. The registry is directed to do the needful today itself. Objections, if any, to the report of the Committee be filed by the parties within a week with an advance copy to each other. Part arguments heard. Matter to come up on 22.04.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 01-Apr-2022 |
| 19-Jan-2022 | PENDING | The report of Committee constituted by the Authority has not yet been received so far as two members of the committee are down with fever and Covid related symptoms. A general request by the counsel of the complainant was made that the committee be asked to submit its report in a time bound manner failing which the Authority may decide the matter at its own on the basis of documents available on the file. A reference to the Committee be sent for submission of its report by 10.02.2022 positively. Further after receiving the report from the committee, the same shall also be hosted on the website of the Authority by 15.02.2022 for general information to all concerned and filing of objections, if any thereon by 28.02.2022 so that the same may be taken up on the next date of hearing. Matter to come up on 25.03.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 19-Jan-2022 |
| 11-Nov-2021 | PENDING | The High Powered Committee constituted by the Authority for the purpose of giving its detailed report have sought time to submit the report. Request is allowed. Case is adjourned to 19.01.2022 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 02-Dec-2021 |
| 27-Sep-2021 | PENDING | The high powered Committee constituted by the Authority for the purpose of giving its detailed report w.r.t various allied issues raised by the home buyers in all the complaints have sought one months time to submit the detailed report. In view of this, one month time is granted. Case be adjourned to 11.11.2021. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL SAMIR KUMAR | View Order | 30-Sep-2021 |
| 13-Sep-2021 | PENDING | Vide earlier orders dated 06.07.2021 and 17.08.2021, a high powered committee has been constituted headed by Shri Manik Sonawane IAS (retired) including Shri R.K. Singh CTP retired, Shri Laxmi Kant Saini CA, Shri Rakesh Kumar Agarwal, Senior General Manager, Finance & Accounts, Shri Sunil Kumar Jha, Senior Vice President (Architecture) on behalf of B.P.T.P and Shri Vineet Umesh Gupta and Shri Hardeep Singh, the nominees of the allottees of Park Spacio project. It has also been decided that the nominees of the home buyers may also be included in the Committee of all the BPTP projects viz Park Generation; Park Terra; Amostria; Aster Garden; Mansions Park Prime etc. so that a comprehensive inferences in the various issues as mandated for the purpose of submissions findings by the Committee may be made out. The Chairman of the high powered committee has requested for two weeks time for submission of report of the Committee. In view of the request made by him, two weeks time be granted so that a comprehensive detailed report w.r.t. various issues involved may be brought on record. The report should be duly signed by all the Members as well as nominees of the home buyers for the purpose of authentication. Registry is directed to do the needful. Matter to come up on 27.09.2021. | K K KHANDELWAL SAMIR KUMAR | View Order | 27-Sep-2021 |
| 10-Aug-2021 | PENDING | Part arguments heard. In principle the authority is of the considered view that the complainant is entitled for delayed possession charges. Rest/allied issues will be decided as per recommendation of the Committee organized for the purpose. Registry is directed to prepare final judgment after receipt of the recommendation of the committee. Counsel for the respondent is directed to submit written arguments within 10 days with an advance copy to the complainant. Matter to come up on 13.09.2021 for further arguments. | VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL SAMIR KUMAR | View Order | 27-Aug-2021 |
| 26-May-2021 | PENDING | Matter to come up on 10.08.2021 for further proceedings. | K K KHANDELWAL SAMIR KUMAR VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 05-Jun-2021 |
| 06-Apr-2021 | PENDING | File has been received by way of transfer from the court of Shri S.C.Goyal, Adjudicating Officer, Gurugram. Due to paucity of time matter could not be taken up as the Authority is busy in hearing arguments in CR No.2150 of 2018 titled as Vikas Mangla versus BPTP and other related matters of Amstoria project. Matter to come up on 26.05.2021. | K K KHANDELWAL SAMIR KUMAR VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL | View Order | 20-Apr-2021 |
| 24-Feb-2021 | PENDING | An application has been moved by the complainant seeking amendment of complaint under section 38 (2) of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016 alongwith order VI Rule XVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It is submitted by the complainant that by way of moving said application, he is seeking delayed possession charges and possession of unit and did not want refund. In view of the request made by the complainant in the application, the said application is allowed and it is directed that the said complaint be transferred from the court of Adjudicating Officer to this Authority. Registry is directed to do the needful. Matter to come up on 06.04.2020. | K K KHANDELWAL SAMIR KUMAR | --- | --- |
| 19-Jan-2021 | FIRST HEARING | Proceedings There are 121 cases listed today and in all these cases BPTP Ltd. is the respondent. These cases relate to three projects, namely, Spacio (95 cases), Terra (22 cases) Centra One (2 cases) and Park Prime (2 cases). Out of these 121 cases, reply has been filed in the following 22 cases:- (in 13 cases of project Spacio) bearing CR No.561/2019, CR 4308/2019, CR 6791/2019, CR 290/2020, CR 285/2020, CR 288/2020, CR 291/2020, CR 289/2020, CR 3378/2020, CR 3348/2020, CR 3380/2020, CR 2823/2020, CR 2665/2020. (in 5 cases of Project Terra) bearing CR 2391/2019, CR 2392/2019, CR 3258/2019, CR 706/2020, CR 2927/2020, (in 2 cases of Project Centra One) CR 419/2019 and CR 2274/2019 (in 2 cases of Project Park Prime) CR 2889/2020 and CR 3001/2020 It is informed by the Registry that service in the cases where reply has not been filed is complete. The counsel for the respondent intimated that in one CR No.3365 of 2020 they have not received any copy of the complaint either from the complainant or from the Registry. The counsel for the complainant has made a statement that he has a proof that service is complete. The Assistant Registrar is directed to conduct an enquiry whether the service is complete or not. But for the sake of at least now for furnishing reply by the respondent, copy of complaint be handed over to the counsel for the respondent by the counsel for the complainant. The counsel for the respondent further submitted that they have filed reply in 27 cases whereas Registry is showing that reply is filed only in 22 cases. Regarding these 5 cases, proof shall be submitted by the respondent and an additional copy be made available to the Registry within 3 days. With a view to enforce discipline regarding filing reply, the authority decided to impose penalty of Rs.10,000/- in each case where complaint was filed prior to month of October 2020 and reply has not yet been filed. The respondent is directed to file reply within 15 days as has been committed by the counsel for the respondent otherwise they will be liable to a penalty of Rs.25,000/- in each case. The promoter is also directed to file on affidavit information relating to following:- i) The nomenclature of unit numbers used in approved building plans and occupation certificate is at variance with the nomenclature used for marketing. The respondent in the replies filed so far has not clarified the position regarding respective towers named as Tower M, Tower N, Tower P, Tower Q, Tower L, Tower K etc. It is so confusing that nothing can be made out from the documents filed whether the occupation certificate for the towers in subject-matter cases has been obtained. This should have been informed to the allottee much prior to obtaining occupation certificate based on the approved building plans. ii) The promoter to submit attested copies of documents submitted to the department alongwith application for obtaining occupation certificate and subsequently to attend observations raised by the competent authority. iii) The deed of declaration and documents filed in compliance of provisions of Haryana Apartment Ownership Act, 1983 in respect of each such concern deed of declaration where the unit of the complainant is covered. iv) A consolidated statement of unit wise details of super area, carpet area at the time of booking or original building plans approved and at the time of offering possession and justification. v) The details of charges demanded from the allottees which are not part of Builder Buyer Agreement alongwith justification. vi) The details of charges demanded from the allottees which have been disputed, the reason and justification of such demands. vii) The occupation certificate in respect of Towers K, L, N ( as per occupation certificate Tower 8, 9 and 11 and EWS Block A & B) was obtained on 30th July 2020 vide No.ZP-437-Vol.II/JD (AS)/2020/13344 and in respect of towers M, P, Q (as per occupation certificate Tower 10,12,13 and EWS Block-B balance units) on 15th January 2021 vide No.ZP-437-Vol.III/AD (RA)/2020/890. The promoter is duty bound to offer possession within two months of obtaining occupation certificate but in some cases it has not been done, the reasons be given by the promoter. viii) The copy of occupation certificate received in respect of Towers where the units in the complaints are situated be also submitted. ix) The detailed justification of various parameters included in the cost escalation either taken from CPWD sources or from the internal documents of the promoter be submitted. CR No.3845/2020, CR 3844/2020, CR 3846/2020, CR 2927 of 2019 and CR 3948 of 2020 pertain to refund, hence these complaints be transferred to Adjudicating Officer and the next date of hearing will be notified by the Registry. Some of the allottees have brought to the notice of the authority that their units have changed unilaterally without their consent which is mandatory requirement under section 14 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The counsel for the complainants were asked to submit their detailed arguments in respect of the relief sought by the complainants in their complaints. Matter to come up on 24.02.2021. | K K KHANDELWAL SAMIR KUMAR | View Order | 23-Feb-2021 |
| Date of Judgement | Party Details | Judgement Uploading Date | View Judgement |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26-Apr-2022 | ALOK KUMAR V/S BPTP LTD. |
10-May-2022 |
|
| Dak ID | Receiving Date | Submitted By | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| 45983 | 19/12/2022 | ADV HARSHIT BATRA | RECTIFICATION APPPLICATION ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT |
| 16290 | 17/02/2021 | AMIT DWIVEDI | APP FOR AMENDEMENT |
| 12081 | 29/10/2020 | JOEL | NEW COMPLAINT |
| 16967 | 01/03/2021 | SIDDHANT YADAV | REPLY RECEIVED |
Web Information Manager
Shri Arvind Mehtani,Executive Director, HRERA
Mini Secretariat, New Office Block,
2nd & 3rd Floor ,Sector-1,
Panchkula,
Haryana- 134114,India
Email: hrerapkl[dash]hry[at]gov[dot]in
Telephone: +91 172-2584232,2585232
Website Designed and Developed By National Informatics Centre (NIC) and Owned by HRERA PANCHKULA & HRERA GURUGRAM Jointly
© 2018 Copyright. All Rights Reserved.