A Mohali Buyer Paid In Full Without A Sale Agreement: What Punjab RERA Ordered मोहाली के एक ख़रीदार ने बिना सेल एग्रीमेंट के पूरा भुगतान किया: पंजाब रेरा ने क्या आदेश दिया ਮੋਹਾਲੀ ਦੇ ਇੱਕ ਖ਼ਰੀਦਦਾਰ ਨੇ ਬਿਨਾਂ ਸੇਲ ਐਗਰੀਮੈਂਟ ਦੇ ਪੂਰੀ ਅਦਾਇਗੀ ਕੀਤੀ: ਪੰਜਾਬ ਰੇਰਾ ਨੇ ਕੀ ਹੁਕਮ ਦਿੱਤਾ

A buyer who books a commercial unit in Mohali and pays the price in a few months may end up holding nothing more than receipts and an offer letter. An order of the Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority dated the fourteenth of October shows how the law treats that position. The authority told a developer to sign and register the agreement for sale it had never executed, to transfer the unit to the buyer's legal heirs and to pay interest for the delay. The order was reported by LiveLaw on the twentieth of October and by the Hindustan Times on the twenty first.

What the case was about

According to both reports, a retired Major General booked a complete business unit in the Sushma Empiria project in January two thousand and twenty. His family told the authority that he paid the whole basic sale price over the next five months. No written agreement for sale was ever signed or registered, and the unit was never transferred. The allottee has since died, and his legal representatives brought the complaint.

The family also said that monthly returns promised by the developer stopped in April two thousand and twenty one. They claimed the carpet area of the unit was smaller than the area they had been charged for, by a margin that would mean a large overpayment.

The developer disputed almost all of this. It said the basic sale price was much lower than the family claimed, and that the rest of the money related to further units that were discussed and never finalised. It relied on an offer letter of June two thousand and twenty, which treated three units as one and gave the end of December two thousand and twenty seven as the possession date. It described the monthly payments as price reductions linked to those further purchases.

The section thirteen point

The heart of the order is section thirteen of the Real Estate Act of two thousand and sixteen. It says a promoter "shall not accept a sum more than ten per cent of the cost" of the unit as an advance or application fee "without first entering into a written agreement for sale" and registering it.

The authority held that the developer could not take a substantial part of the price without meeting that duty and then point to an informal arrangement to push possession years into the future. LiveLaw quotes the order as saying that the statutory obligation "cannot be defeated by relying upon an unregistered or informal arrangement to postpone the promoter's obligation for an indefinite period."

The reports say the authority listed the papers that cannot stand in for the agreement. An offer letter does not. Applications and affidavits do not either. Indemnity papers and statements of account kept by the developer do not count. It directed the developer to execute the agreement in line with the Act and the Punjab rules as well as the sanctioned plans. It also told it to finish the transfer in favour of the heirs.

The Hindustan Times adds that the authority told its secretary to open separate proceedings against the promoter under section sixty one read with section thirteen. Section sixty one is the general penalty provision for a promoter who breaks the Act. That is a matter between the regulator and the developer, and the report gives no figure for it.

How a delay is measured with no agreed date

Because no valid agreement fixed a date for possession, the authority had to decide when the delay began. It took three years from the date of booking as a reasonable time to offer possession, which put the due date in late January two thousand and twenty three. Interest for delay under section eighteen of the Act runs from the next day until lawful possession is offered.

LiveLaw reports the authority's caution on this point. The three year period was a benchmark for working out when statutory delay began. It was never a contract term. The date in the offer letter carried no weight because the offer letter was never an agreement for sale.

Monthly returns and delay interest kept apart

The authority dealt separately with the monthly returns the family said had been promised. It awarded returns at the rate the family claimed on the basic price, for the period from April two thousand and twenty one until the end of January two thousand and twenty three, after adjusting what had already been paid. From the following day, statutory delay interest takes over.

The two cannot both be recovered for the same stretch of time. The order draws a line at the date by which possession was due. Before it, the contractual promise governs. After it, the statute does.

The reports do not say how the authority settled the dispute over what the basic price actually was. LiveLaw and the Hindustan Times give different figures for the amount the family said was paid, and neither quotes a finding on the developer's lower figure. Readers would be wrong to treat any single number in the press accounts as settled by the order.

The carpet area question

On the claimed shortfall in carpet area, the authority made no final finding. It told the developer to file the sanctioned plans and an authenticated area statement, together with a calculation of the price for the permissible carpet area, within thirty days. If that check shows that more was charged than the area allows, the excess is to be refunded with interest.

Carpet area has a fixed meaning under the Act. It is the net usable floor area, leaving out external walls, service shafts, balconies and open terraces. A price quoted on any wider measure can be tested against that definition once the plans are on the record.

Time to comply

The authority gave the developer sixty days from receipt of a certified copy to carry out the remaining directions. The Hindustan Times reports that the order also lays down a recovery process if the money directions are not met. Either side may appeal to the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal within the time the Act allows, and neither report says whether an appeal is planned.

Why the order matters for Mohali buyers

Commercial units in Mohali and its edges are often sold on booking forms and offer letters that run to a page or two. Some come with side letters promising monthly payments until possession. The order shows how the regulator reads that paperwork when a dispute reaches it.

It treats the agreement for sale as the document that fixes rights. It holds the promoter to the duty of signing one once more than a tenth of the price has been paid. It also it refuses to let a date in an informal letter do the work of an agreed possession date. The contractual returns and the statutory interest are kept in separate compartments.

The order also shows that heirs stand in the shoes of a buyer who has died. The complaint was brought by the legal representatives, and the transfer was ordered in their favour.

What the order does not settle

This is one order of the authority, read here through two press reports and a legal news summary. The full text was not available to us at the time of writing. It turns on its own payments and its own papers. The developer's version of the price and of the extra units has not been tested in public beyond what the reports describe.

It also says nothing about the tax treatment of the monthly returns or the interest, and nothing about stamp duty on the agreement that now has to be registered. Those are separate questions.

Related reading

- A Mohali plot allotment cancelled over dues: what Punjab RERA ordered after the resale
- When a Mohali builder ignores a consumer forum order: how enforcement works

Sources: The sources we use are listed on our Editorial Sources page.

This piece describes a reported order of the Punjab Real Estate Regulatory Authority and the published text of the Real Estate Act. Nothing here is legal advice, and any dispute over a booking turns on its own papers and facts.