Where interest is sought as interest simpliciter and not by way of compensation per say, the RERA Authority has necessary jurisdiction to deal with such claim under Section 18 of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 | Delayed in possession due to delay in granting permissions/ sanctions from various competent authorities etc. cannot be construed as force majeure – Spenta Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mr. Ashlesh Gosain – Maharashtra REAT
(i) If the Allottee chooses to continue in the project, he is entitled only interest on delayed possession and not compensation. Therefore, in this Appeal, the Authority has considered his claim limited to interest on delayed possession, therefore, no adjudication in nature of decree is involved to attract the jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Officer.
(ii) Under Section 71 of the RERA Act, the Adjudicating Officer primarily has jurisdiction to decide the case where the adjudication is required for awarding compensation and or interest where the interest being sought qua compensation falls under the sway of compensation. Where interest is sought as interest simpliciter and not by way of compensation per say, the Authority has necessary jurisdiction to deal with such claim under Section 18 of the Act.
(iii) Delay in granting permissions/ sanctions from various competent authorities, etc. as contended by the Promoter cannot be construed as force majeure.
(iv) The language employed in Section 18(1)(a) makes it clear that the Promoter is obligated to handover the possession of flat as per the agreement for sale by the date specified therein.
(v) Even if, force majeure factors as demonstrated by the Promoter are given some consideration, we are of the view that the Promoter is not entitled to get benefit of the same for the reasons that the same are not attributable to the Allottee nor is the case of the Promoter that the Allottee in any way has caused delay in possession.