Heard Shri Badal Chatterjee, appellant in person and Shri Vaibhav Krishna, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ratnesh Chandra, learned counsel for the respondent.
This second appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 10.12.2020, passed by the U.P.Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in Appeal No.129 of 2019 and the order dated 03.06.2019 passed in Complaint No.1201928945 by the U.P.Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow.
Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that the respondent authority is charging higher rate of interest while the appellant has been allowed only the interest at the rate of MCLR+1% for the delayed period and the appellant has not been allowed the interest on the higher side. He further submitted that the Flat in question was to be handed over to the appellant in September 2014, but the project was delayed due to pole in the land in question because of which construction was delayed, but no interest has been given to the appellant for the said period. He also submitted that the Real Estate Regulatory Authority had allowed the parking cost to be included in the cost of the house but the same has been set aside by the appellate authority without considering that the same is included in the cost of house and the same cannot be charged separately. No other ground has been argued and pressed by the appellant-in-person.
Learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the submissions of appellant and submitted that no substantial question of law is involved in the appeal. The interest at the rate of MCLR+1% has been given to both in case of default by the appellant as well as the respondent. He further submitted that for the period of delay 5% rebate has already been given which is recorded in the order passed by the U.P.Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow and the appellate authority and the parking charges are payable by the appellant as per terms and conditions.
Having considered the submissions of the parties and going through the record this court finds that the judgments passed by the U.P.Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Lucknow as well as the Real Estate Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow are well considered. The interest @ MCLR+1% has been awarded to the appellant as well as the respondent both in case of default by either of the parties. In regard to the delay in construction rebate of 5% has been given by the respondent authority. So far as the question of parking charges is concerned, since there was contradiction in the direction of the U.P.Real Estate Regulatory Authority, the Appellate authority has set aside the same on the basis of the terms and conditions of brochure, according to which the parking charges are payable by the allottee.
In view of above, the contention of the appellant are misconceived and no substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal.
It is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
.........................................(Rajnish Kumar,J.) Order Date :- 11.2.2021 Banswar