Dera Bassi Plot Possession Letter Did Not Stop Interest डेरा बस्सी प्लॉट का कब्ज़ा पत्र ब्याज नहीं रोक सका ਡੇਰਾ ਬੱਸੀ ਪਲਾਟ ਦਾ ਕਬਜ਼ਾ ਪੱਤਰ ਵਿਆਜ ਨਹੀਂ ਰੋਕ ਸਕਿਆ

A letter calling itself an offer of possession did not end a Dera Bassi plot buyer's claim to delay interest. Punjab RERA has ordered the developers of ATS Golf Meadows-II Extension to finish the colony's works, get a completion certificate, register the conveyance deed and hand over the plot, and to pay interest on everything the buyers paid from the date possession fell due until the day it is actually handed over.

The order, passed on the fifth of November by a single member of Punjab RERA, also rejected the developers' main defence. They argued that the colony had been regularised years ago, so it needed no completion certificate and fell outside the Real Estate Act altogether. The authority's answer was short: "Regularization of a colony and completion of a real estate project are two distinct matters."

A plot paid for in full and still not handed over

The complaint was filed in July twenty twenty four by two buyers who now live in Mumbai. They were allotted a plot of a little under one hundred and fifty square yards in the project in Dera Bassi on the thirtieth of July twenty fourteen. An agreement for sale was signed the same day. The order records that they paid the full price.

Clause twenty one of that agreement promised possession within three years of signing. It made that promise "subject to execution and registration of the conveyance deed". The deadline was therefore the thirtieth of July twenty seventeen.

Ten days before that date, the developers sent a letter that described itself as a possession certificate or offer of possession. The buyers told the authority that no conveyance deed was ever registered in their name and that they never got physical possession of the plot. They said the project was incomplete and basic amenities were missing.

The developers relied on an older offer and the colony's regularisation

ATS Estates and two group companies named in the complaint said they had offered possession much earlier, in October twenty fifteen. The buyers, they said, never came forward to take the plot or get the sale deed registered. They said further offers followed and went unanswered.

Their larger argument was about the law. The colony, they said, had been regularised in February twenty fourteen after the required charges and compounding fee were paid, and the buyers bought only after that. Once a colony is regularised, they argued, its civic amenities pass to the municipal authority and no completion certificate is required. The project did not need RERA registration, so the Act did not apply. They also objected that the municipal authority had not been made a party.

Regularisation did not take the colony outside the Act

The authority first had to decide whether it could hear the complaint at all. It held that regularisation cannot be treated as the same thing as a completion certificate under the Act. Section two, clause q of the Real Estate Act defines a completion certificate as one issued by the competent authority certifying that a project has been developed as per the sanctioned plan and the approved specifications. The order cited the Supreme Court's ruling in Newtech Promoters and Developers versus State of Uttar Pradesh, which brought ongoing projects without a completion certificate under the Act.

The developers had placed no completion certificate on record. Their own case was that none was needed. The authority held that this claim "cannot, by itself, take the project outside the statutory framework of the Act".

It added that the lack of RERA registration did not help them either. Whether the Act applies "is to be determined on the basis of the statutory requirements and the actual status of the project, and not merely on the basis of whether the promoter obtained registration".

The objection about the municipal authority failed too. The buyers' claim was against the developer they had signed with and paid. The order asked why the agreement promised possession within three years at all if a regularised colony was already complete in the developers' eyes.

A letter is not possession

On the offers of possession, the authority leaned on the Supreme Court's September twenty twenty four judgment in Dharmendra Sharma versus Agra Development Authority, which the buyers had cited. That case dealt with an offer of possession made before the required completion and statutory clearances were in place.

"The mere issuance of a letter describing it as an offer of possession cannot, by itself, constitute lawful and valid delivery of possession," the order says. A promoter "cannot shift the burden upon the allottee merely by issuing an offer of possession" while its own obligations remain unmet.

The developers had not shown, with evidence, that the plot was lawfully ready on the date of the October twenty fifteen letter or on any date before the deadline. They had also not shown that a conveyance deed was executed and registered, which clause twenty one made a condition of handing over the plot. The earlier letters therefore could not stop interest from running.

Interest from the deadline until real possession

The buyers had asked for the plot and for interest. They had not asked for a refund. Under section eighteen of the Act, a buyer who stays in the project is entitled to interest for every month of delay until possession is handed over. The authority applied that rule.

It directed the developers to complete the remaining works and promised amenities and to obtain a completion or part completion certificate or other required approval. After that they must execute and register the conveyance deed and give actual physical possession. The work is to be done within three months, or within any longer period genuinely needed to get the certificate.

Interest runs from the thirtieth of July twenty seventeen to the date of lawful handover, at the rate prescribed under the Punjab RERA rules. It can be adjusted against any lawful amount the buyers still owe. The developers may not charge holding charges or other penal charges for the period when they were in default.

The buyers still have to pay stamp duty, registration charges and other statutory dues when the conveyance deed is registered, subject to that adjustment. Each side bears its own costs, and a compliance report is to be placed on record once the period ends.

What this order settles and what it leaves open

This is one order by one member of Punjab RERA. It binds the parties to this complaint and does not decide the position of other buyers in the colony, who would have to bring their own cases. The developers can appeal to the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, and no appeal has been reported so far.

The order does not list the works still pending in the colony, and it does not say which authority would issue the completion certificate it requires. The municipal body that took over the colony's amenities was not a party.

The reasoning is the part that travels. Many plotted colonies around [Dera Bassi](/area/derabassi) and [Zirakpur](/location/zirakpur) were regularised under Punjab's policies for unauthorised colonies before RERA took effect. Our report on [whether Punjab's colony regularisation window opened around Mohali](/article/333-did-punjab-s-new-colony-regularisation-window-ever-open-for-plots-around-mohali) covers how those policies work. This order treats regularisation as a separate track from completion under the Act.

The question of when a project is complete also came up when [Zirakpur and Kurali projects sought completion certificates](/article/389-zirakpur-and-kurali-projects-seek-completion-certificates). On delay interest that survives a later arrangement between builder and buyer, see our report on the [Zirakpur flat buyer who got delay interest despite a settlement](/article/414-zirakpur-flat-buyer-gets-delay-interest-despite-settlement).

The three month window for the works runs from the fifth of November. Unless the developers seek and justify more time for the certificate, the compliance report is due in early February.

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

This report describes a single Punjab RERA order as published by the authority. It does not offer legal advice, and any buyer's position turns on the agreement, the payments and the project records in that case.