BEFORE

THE BIHAR REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA

APPENDIX
FORM A
CHEKLIST FOR SCRUTINY OF APPEAL

Appeal No.-----------------------------------------Complain No.

Parties
Smt. Anamika ---------------------Appellant
Between
Shri Bhushan Kumar Singh ---------------------Respondent

1. Legal provisions: U 44/sec. of RERA

act.

2. Whether the name of the parties and their

address are yes/No Properly mentioned in the
Appeal Memo

3. Whether certified copy of impugned Order/

Judgment I yes/No is filed with the appeal.

4. What is the:-
a) Date of the order :-
b) Date of its communication to the
party by RERA:-
c) Date of application for
certified copy:-

1
 d) Date on which copy was ready:-
e) Date of receipt of certified copy :-
f) Date of online filing of appeal :-
g) Date of submission of hard copy of
Appeal Memo :-
h) Whether there is any delay in submission
of hard Yes/No copy of Appeal Memo :-
i) If yes. How many days :-

5. Is appeal filed within limitation (60 days):-

6. ( from the date of receipt of order)

7. Whether there is any delay in filing of appeal :

Yes/ No If yes, how many days :-

8. Whether application for condo nation of delay is

filed Yes/ No With appeal :-

9. If not, raise its objection.

10. 8. Whether requisite fees paid :- Yes/No If yes, copy
of the receipt & date of payment :-

11. 9. Whether Appellate the promoter has deposited at

Least 30% of the penalty if improved in the impugned
order Yes/No

12. 10. Whether the required documents are filed

with Index yes/No & pagination :-
13. If yes, whether the
documents are legible:-

14. 11. i) Whether the copy of appeal memo is

annexed for Yes/ No Giving the same to other Sid :

2
15. ii) Or served to other side by post / courier :
Yes/No

16. 12.Whether Vakalatname /

Authorization is filed and Properly
stamped

17. 13.Whether e-mail/ phone/ Mobile No. is on

record :- Yes /No

18. Signature of the Clerk scrutiny Branch

19. Submission: Matter placed before

hon’ble Chairperson for seeking Allotment
Order.

a. Registrar,
Bihar
REAT

3
 BEFORE
THE BIHAR REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA

Appeal No. ________________of 2020

Smt. Anamika ……… Appellant

Between

Shri Bhushan Kumar Singh & ors. ………. Respondents

S.NO PARTICULARS PAGE NOS.

1. Appeal petition with affidavit
2. Annexure-1: Photocopy of registered agreement to sale dated 09.10.2012
3. Annexure-2(A): Photocopy of the sanction letter of Axis Bank dated
05.09.2012
4. Annexure-2(B) : Photocopy of the no-objection letter dated 12.10.2012
5. Annexure-3: Photocopy of the letter dated 04.02.2013
6. Annexure-4: Photocopy of D.D. dated 23.03.2013
7. Annexure-5: Photocopy of the sanction letter dated 23.04.2013
8. Annexure-6 Series: Photocopies of the LIC surrender certificate and
borrowing from Bihar Post and telegraph Society and Union Bank of
India and withdrawal from EPF
9. Annexure-7: Photocopy of the legal notice dated 24.07.2017
10. Annexure-8: Photocopy of the reply legal notice dated 11.08.2017.
11. Annexure- 9: Photocopy of rejoinder dated 16.08.2017.
12. Annexure-10: Photocopy of the order dated 07.03.2018 passed by the
learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,Patna.
13. Annexure-11: Photocopy of order sheet of Complaint no 3412 (c ) 2017.
14. Annexure-12: Photocopy of the compromise/joint petition
15. Annexure-13: Photocopy of order dated 11.01.2019 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 57911 of 2018.
16. Annexure- 14 : Photocopy of order dated 28.10.2020 passed in
RERA/AO/133/2019
17. Annexure – 15: Photocopy of agreement between Respondent no 1 and
developer and approval letter of P.R.D.A.

18. Vakalatnama

Signature of the Appellants (s)

4
BEFORE
THE BIHAR REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PATNA

Appeal No. ________________of 2020

(Appeal Under section 44 (1) of The RERA Act, 2016, arising

from the impugned order RERA/AO/133/2019 dated
28.10.2020 passed by the Ld. Adjudicating Officer)

Smt. Anamika ……… Appellant

Between

Shri Bhushan Kumar Singh & ors. ………. Respondents

MEMO OF APPEAL
Details of Appeal:

1. Particulars of the Appellant ( S ):

Smt. Anamika wife of Sri Vijay Kumar, Resident of Village-
Tehati, Post-Silhourih, Police Station- Marhowrah , District-
Saran ( Bihar) ,Presently Resident of Flat No-204,Manmohan
Palace,Akashvani Road, P.S-Shastri Nagar, Khajpura ,
Patna-800014
Phone No:-0612-2590070
Mobile No:-9461162511& 9414004017
email:-tehati1980@gmail.com

5
2. Particulars of the Respondents:
I. Shri Bhushan Kumar Singh son of Shri Bindeshwari
Prasad Singh, Village- Jalalpur, Police Station:-
Rupaspur, P.O- Sahay Nagar ( Dhanaut), Danapur,
District-Patna ( Bihar).Presently resident of Ramnagri
More,Above HDFC Bank ATM,Ashiana Digha Main Road,
Ashiana Nagar, P.S-Rajiv Nagar,Patna-800025.Mobile No:-
9308245011
II. Vision Land PVT. LTD. through its Managing Director,
Vision Rupak Mall, Rupak Cinema Campus ,Bari
Path ,Patna-800004

3. Jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal:

The appellant declares that the subject matter of the appeal

falls within the jurisdiction of the Appellate Tribunal.

4. Limitation:

The appellant declares that the appeal is within

the limitation specified in sub-section (2) of section 44.

5. Facts of the case :

The facts which give rise to the Appeal are stated hereunder:
A. This appeal is being filed by the appellant, Smt. Anamika

against the order dated 28.10.2020 passed by the learned

Adjudicating Officer, RERA, Patna in
RERA/CC/538/2019/RERA/AO/133/2019 whereby and
where under the learned Adjudicating Officer has
disposed of the complaint of the appellant awarding
inadequate compensation, interest and has rejected one of
the prayer of the complaint relating to execution of sale-

6
 deed in favour of complainant with respect to the flat in
question.
B. That the appellant Smt. Anamika is house wife and part-

time tutor and her husband is Junior Telecom Officer in

B.S.N.L., Khajpura, Patna. In September, 2012, the
Respondent No.1 approached the appellant and
persuaded her to buy a flat in “Vision Galaxy Apartment”
from the share of land owner and upon his persuasion
and recommendation of one Indrajeet Kumar Singh, the
appellant had become ready to purchase the flat. The
Respondent No.1 had shown the Development Agreement
and other papers with respect to the Apartment, in the
office of Respondent No.2.
C. That, thereafter, a registered Agreement for Sale
No.26686 on 09.10.2012 with respect to the flat No.309 in
“Vision Galaxy Apartment” having super built up area 933
sq. fts. with car parking space and proportionate share in
land was executed between the parties for a consideration
of Rs.18,54,501/-. The details of the land on which the
apartment is constructed is as follows:
Thana Code no.123, Thana no. 22, Tougi no.5523,
Khata no.139, 130 and 142, Survey no. 267, 268
and 249.
Total area of Vision Galaxy – 136.24 decimal.
Boundary:-
North- Plot no. 266 and Plot no. 267,

7
 South- Plot no. 269 and plot no. 270
East-Plot no. 271
West-Siwana Kothwa.

Boundary of Flat No 309:-

North- Galiyara, South-Open Space, East-Flat no-
308, West – Flat no-310
D. The appellant paid Rs.1,05,000/- towards consideration

as advance and got money receipt from the Respondent

No.1. It was agreed in the Agreement for Sale that the rest
amount will be payable at the time of registry of the flat,
which will be done after 3 months of completion of the
construction. But, after execution of the Agreement for
Sale, the Respondent No.1 started demanding further
money. As per terms of the Agreement for Sale, the
appellant was not obliged to pay any sort of money
towards the consideration amount, but due to repeated
insistence of the Respondent No.1 and upon assurance
given by him for the earliest delivery of the flat, the
appellant’s husband somehow managed to pay him
Rs.2,65,900/- in cash in the month of January, 2013, for
which he was compelled to sell his property at Jaipur. The
Respondent No.1 kept on convincing the appellant that
early payment of the part of consideration amount would
enable him to complete and hand over the flat to the
appellant at the earliest.

8
 Photocopies of registered
agreement to sale
Dated 09.10.2012 is annexed
hereto and marked as
Annexure-1 to this petition.

E. That the appellant and her husband had earlier applied

for Home Loan for which the builder company had earlier
provided ‘permission to mortgage’ vide letter dated
12.10.2012 to the AXIS Bank and which was sanctioned
from AXIS Bank on 05.09.2012 with the terms and
conditions mentioned in the said sanction letter. When
the appellant demanded Completion/Occupancy
Certificate to fulfill the terms and conditions of the Bank
Loan for disbursement of the rest part of the consideration
amount, the Respondent No.1 stated that she should wait
for some time, as lot of work was still to be carried out.
But, due to non-cooperation of the Respondent No.1, the
sanctioned loan could not be disbursed.
Photocopies of the sanction letter
of Axis Bank dated 05.09.2012
and no-objection letter dated
12.10.2012 are annexed hereto
and marked as Annexure-2(A)
and 2(B) to this petition.
F. That on further demand of the money by the Respondent

No.1 vide letter dated 04.02.2013 wherein he had

acknowledged that 20% of the consideration amount was
paid till that date and 80% of the amount was due and

9
 demanded Rs.12,98,151/- out of rest consideration. Again
the appellant paid Rs.81,000/- through D.D. No.001936
dated 23.03.2013 of AXIS Bank, which was earned by the
appellant through tuition fee.
Photocopies of the letter dated
04.02.2013 and D.D. dated
23.03.2013 is annexed hereto
and marked as Annexure-3 and
Annexure-4 to this petition.
G. That, thereafter, the loan of the appellant was sanctioned

by H.D.F.C. Bank on 23.04.2013 vide file

No.607912812/VINI Service Centre, Patna. Again the
appellant demanded Completion/Occupancy Certificate
from the Respondent, but the Respondent No.1 failed to
provide these Certificates and demanded money saying
that the same is urgently required for completing the
construction of the project.
Photocopy of the sanction letter
dated 23.04.2013 is annexed
hereto and marked as
Annexure-5 to this petition.

H. That as per frequent demands by the Respondent No.1,

the appellant made arrangements from different sources

and paid the following amounts in cash towards
consideration amount :-

10
Date Particulars Amount
(Rs.)
12.10.12 First installment to 1,05,000
Respondent
January 2013 Cash from selling property in 2,65,000
Jaipur
23.3.13 D.D. payment 81,000
24.4.13-31.12.13 Cash payment 2,34,000

1.1.14-15.7.14 Cash payment 2,52,000

1 Cash payment 1,48,000
1.8.14-8.12.14
4 Cash payment 1,54,000
4.1.15-30.6.15
Total amount 12,39,900

I. That the appellant’s husband got Personal Loan from

Bihar Post & Telegraph Society and Union Bank of India

and had also withdrawn some money from E.P.F. and had
surrendered Insurance Policy of L.I.C. In this way, the
appellant had already paid a total amount of
Rs.12,39,900/- to the Respondent No.1 towards the
consideration money of Rs,18,54,501/-
Photocopies of the LIC surrender
certificate and borrowing from Bihar
Post and telegraph Society and Union
Bank of India and withdrawal from
EPF are annexed hereto and marked
as Annexure-6 series to this petition.
11
J. That the Respondent No.1 on pretext of installation of

modular kitchen had taken Rs.1,90,000/- from the

appellant. After payment of aforesaid amount towards the
consideration money for flat No.309, the Respondent No.1
still did not execute Sale Deed of the aforesaid flat in favor
of the appellant. The appellant had come to know that
Sale Deeds had been executed in respect of few flats in the
said project “Vision Galaxy Apartment” in favor of
respective buyers, but Respondents are avoiding executing
Sale Deed of the concerned flat in favor of the appellant.
K. That the appellant and her husband repeatedly tried to

contact the Respondent No.1 and visited several times at

the construction site, but the Respondent No.1 always
misbehaved, abused and threatened for dire
consequences. Hence, she tried on 22.07.2017 to lodge
F.I.R., but when the Police came to know that the matter
is related with land/flat, denied to lodge F.I.R. and
advised to lodge complaint in the Court against the
Respondent.
L. That later on 24.04.2017, a Legal Notice was served on

the Respondent No.1, for execution of Sale Deed within

one month from receipt of the Notice. But, instead of
execution of Sale Deed, Respondent No.1 sent a reply to
the Legal Notice on 11.08.2017, wherein he wrongly
denied the claim of the appellant. Later on 16.08.2017 a
Notice through learned lawyer was sent to the learned
12
 lawyer of the Respondents, but every effort became
fruitless.
Photocopies of the legal notice
dated 24.07.2017 and reply
legal notice dated 11.08.2017 is
annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure-7 and Annexure- 8
to this petition.
M. That in response to the above referred reply to the legal

notice a rejoinder dated 16.08.2017 was sent to the lawyer

of the Respondent no.1 upon instruction and on behalf of
the appellant whereby the appellant is still ready to pay
the remaining amount towards the consideration money
as agreed upon in the agreement to sale dated 09.10.2012
if the Respondent no.1 executes sale deed in her favor for
the flat in question otherwise she would be constrained to
move before appropriate court of law.
Photocopy of the rejoinder dated
16.08.2017 is annexed hereto
and marked as Annexure- 9 to
this petition.
N. That due to the fraudulent act of the Respondent No.1,

the appellant filed complaint case No.3943(C) of 2017,

wherein prima-facie case u/s 406 IPC was found against
the Respondent No.1 and summon was issued to him by
the learned Court. In order to pressurize the appellant,
the Respondent No.1 also filed a counter complaint case
No.3412(C)/2017 before learned C.J,M., Patna against the

13
appellant, her husband and her father Sri Ajit Kumar
Singh on wrong allegations. The husband of the appellant
is a Government employee and her father is a retired
person. Hence, apprehending the fear of facing long
litigation and unnecessary harassment, the appellant got
pressurized and puzzled and having no option, she
entered into a compromise with Respondent No.1.
Thereafter, the Respondent No.1 withdrew the aforesaid
complaint case No.3412(C)/2017, which was finally
allowed to be withdrawn vide order dated 05.11.2018 by
learned Sub. Judge-cum-A.C.J.M., Patna. The Respondent
No.1 handed over the amount of Rs.6,78,500/- to the
appellant in the manner stated in the Joint Compromise
Petition. The Respondent No.1 was enlarged on
anticipatory bail by the Hon’ble High Court, Patna vide
order dated 11.01.2019 in Criminal Miscellaneous
No.57911/2018.
Photocopies of the order dated
07.03.2018 passed by the
learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Patna and relevant
order sheets of complaint no.
3412 (c) 2017 and the
compromise/joint petition and
order dated 11.01.2019 passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 57911 of 2018
are annexed hereto and marked
as Annexure- 10 and
Annexure-11 and 12 and

14
 Annexure-13, respectively, to
this petition.
O. That despite there being valid registered Agreement for

Sale of flat, neither was she handed over the flat in

question nor any compensation had been paid to her by
the Respondents. Now due to escalation of price of
property, she is not able to buy other flat for herself and
as such, she is residing in a rented flat. The above
registered Agreement dated 09.10.2012 is still subsisting
and para no.2 of the same provides compensation by the
Respondent No.1 to the appellant. As such, being fed up
with the behavior of the Respondent No.1, she had filed a
complaint petition before the Adjudicating Officer of
RERA, Bihar against the landlord, Respondent No.1, Sri
Bhushan Kumar Singh and Respondent No.2, M/s Vision
Land Pvt. Ltd. through its Managing Director, u/s 31 read
with Section 71 of Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Act, 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the
“Act, 2016”) for execution and registration of Sale Deed
with respect to the concerned flat No.309 in project
“Vision Galaxy Apartment” and also alternatively grant
compensation as per Section 18 of the Act, 2016 and legal
cost. The said complaint was registered as
RERA/CC/538/2019/RERA/AO/133/2019.
P. That the Respondent No.1 had filed rejoinder pleading

inter-alia that the entire matter of complaint petition is

15
 upheld by doctrine of res-judicata as well as opposing the
relief on various other grounds particularly the joint
petition filed in Criminal Miscellaneous Case
No.57911/2018 wherein the Hon’ble High Court, Patna
has made the observation that “a joint petition has been
filed to the effect that the issue has been reconciled
between the parties on the term to the effect that the
petitioner will return Rs.6,78,500/- to the appellant. Out
of Rs.6,78,500/-, Rs. 2,78,500/- has already been paid to
the appellant and for remaining amount i.e.
Rs.4,00,000/-, a Demand Draft of Bank of India, Ashiana
Nagar Branch, Patna has been produced. The issue has
been resolved and appellant O.P. No.2 is not opposing the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. In view of
specific terms of the settlement arrived between the
parties as has been incorporated in para-3 to 5 of the joint
petition, the parties have settled the disputes.”
Q. That the rejoinder also stated that it is false that the

Respondent No.1 was making pressure to the appellant

for early payment and this plea has been created to
establish base of the case. The truth is that the appellant
has booked this flat, but she is lacking financial capacity
and it is an established fact that any person purchasing
the flat will have to pay the consideration amount. The
letter had been sent whereupon, as a courtesy call, to
each prospective flat owner for clearing some amount and
16
 at present the entire complaint petition has no worth. It is
submitted that the claims of cash payments are false and
baseless and no cash amount has ever been paid. Now,
the Agreement for Sale dated 09.10.2012 is of no worth
and this complaint petition may not be entertained by the
Court and it is fit to be rejected/dismissed.
R. That to the aforesaid rejoinder of the respondent no. 1 the

complainant had submitted a reply pointing out therein

that the joint petition filed in the criminal case does not
create bar to claim compensation under the Act, 2016
which altogether is a pure civil proceeding and the
appellant/complainant is fully justified in claiming the
relief as prayed for in the complaint.
S. That upon the perusal of the facts and circumstances of

the case, the learned Court of the Adjudicating officer held

that :
i. The complaint petition is not barred by the principle of
res-judicata u/s 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908 against the Respondent no.1. No suit of civil
nature was filed by the appellant before any Civil court
rather in complaint case no. 3943 (C) /2017, offence
u/s 406 IPC (Criminal breach of trust) was found. The
principle of estoppel as per Section 115 of Evidence
Act, 1872, must be very clearly pleaded in the
complaint petition/ written statement which the
Respondent has not pleaded in his reply. Hence the
17
 compromise petition dated 10.01.2019 cannot act as a
res-judicata/estoppel against the appellant in filing of
the present petition.
ii. The appellant got the principle amount of Rs.
6,78,500/- refunded by the Joint Compromise Petition
and order of Hon’ble High Court, Patna passed in
Criminal Misc. case no.57911/2018. This shows that
the appellant has no intention to get the Sale Deed in
her favor with respect to the Flat no.309. Therefore,
appellant is not entitled to get executed and registered
Sale Deed on basis of the Agreement for sale dated
09.10.2012.
iii. The appellant may claim interest/compensation as per

Section 18 of the Act as only the principle amount was

refunded by the Respondent which was retained by
him and used in his business to benefit him on the
expense of the appellant. The amount paid and period
of return of particular amount is not clear, therefore,
the amount of compensation to be assessed year to
year according to Rules 17, 18 of Bihar Real Estate
(Regulation and Development) Rules, 2017 cannot be
ascertained. Hence, the appellant was compensated a
lump sum amount of Rs.75,000/-
iv. The appellant had incurred various travelling,
documentation and legal expenses which was decided

18
 to be Rs. 7,000/- and was granted to be paid by the
Respondent.
Photocopy of the order dated
28.10.2020 passed in
RERA/AO/133/2019 is
annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure-14 to this petition.

T. That it is respectfully submitted that the impugned order

of the learned Adjudicating Officer is bad in the eye of law

in fact as it has erroneously decided to pay a lump sum
amount and meager amount as legal expenses. The ld.
Adjudicating Officer has further committed error in
holding that the appellant is not entitled to get the sale
deed executed in her favour.
U. That it is respectfully submitted that the appellant has

been unduly harassed by the respondent no.1 and despite

there being a valid registered agreement to sale executed
between the appellant and the Respondent no.1 on
09.10.2012 at District Registry Office, Patna for sale of
Flat no. 309 in Vision Galaxy Apartment at 3rd floor
measuring built up area 933 sq.ft. with car parking and
proportionate share of land for a consideration amount of
Rs. 18,54,501/- (eighteen lakh fifty four thousand five
hundred one), she was never handed over the flat in
question. As per the agreement between the Respondent
no-1 and Builder (Vision Land PVT Ltd.) dated
25.02.2010, the construction of the apartment in question
19
 was to be completed within 4 years from date of passing of
map by PRDA. The map was approved by PRDA on
07.07.2010. Thus the apartment was to be completed up
to July 2014 but it was not done so. Thus the appellant is
liable to be paid appropriate interest and the interest of
Rs. 75,000/- is very meager and insufficient being paid to
her by the Respondent no.1 as per order of the
Adjudicating Officer in case no. RERA/AO/133/2019.
Now because of escalation in price of the property she is
not able to buy a flat for her and as such she is residing
as tenant in a flat on paying rent. Hence, appropriate
compensation and interest should be calculated from the
execution of the agreement and payment of installations
as per Rule 17 and 18 of Bihar RERA rules, 2017.
Photocopies of the agreement
and approval letter of P.R.D.A. is
annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure-15 of this petition.
V. That because of erroneous act of the Respondent no.1 she

is deprived of owning her own place of abode which is a

dream of any lower middle class residing in a city like
Patna. Hard earned money of herself and her husband
was also kept for long with the respondent no.1.
W. That the above registered agreement dated 09.10.2012 is

still subsisting and it provides in its Para 2 for payment of

compensation by the respondent to the appellant. The
agreement has never been cancelled by the Respondent

20
 nor is any clause stipulated for such effect in the
agreement. The Hon’ble High Court, Patna did not order to
execute any counter agreement to cancel the said
agreement while passing order in Criminal Misc. no.
57911/2018.
X. That in the present scenario and escalation of price of

properties the appellant is not in a position to buy another

flat and as such in the interest of justice, the Respondent
no.1 is liable to hand over to her the flat in terms of the
agreement to sale dated 09.10.2012 on payment of
consideration amount mentioned therein or to
compensate her adequately in terms of the provisions
envisaged in The Real Estate (Regulation & Development)
Act, 2016.
Y. That from the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is

manifest that the Respondent no.1 has violated the

provisions envisaged in sections 17, 18 and other sections
the Act.
Z. That while fixing compensation and interest, the Ld.

Adjudicating Officer has erroneously held that it is not

clear as to when the amount was paid by complainant to
Respondent no.1. In fact in the complaint itself it has
been clearly stated as to when and how much the amount
of consideration has been paid. For the convenience of
this Learned Tribunal, a chart containing details of
payment is being given here and below-
21
Date Particulars Amount (Rs.) Interest @ 9.5
% p.a. upto
Jan 2019*
9.10.12 Registry of Agreement for 37,929 21,620
sale**
12.10.12 First installment to 1,05,000 59,850
Respondent
7.9.12 Axis Bank loan processing 11,236 6,405
charge**
23.4.13 HDFC Bank loan 8,848 5,043
processing charge**
January Cash from selling property 2,65,900 1,51,563
2013 in Jaipur
23.3.13 D.D. payment 81,000 44,348
24.4.13- Cash payment 2,34,000 1,11,150
31.12.13
1.1.14- Cash payment 2,52,000 1,07,100
15.7.14
1 Cash payment 1,48,000 56,240
1.8.14-
8.12.14
4 Cash payment 1,54,000 51,205
4.1.15-
30.6.15
Legal expenses for filing 2,50,000-3,00,000
case, issuing notice and
hiring advocates**
Filing before RERA** 1000 + 5000

TOTAL AMOUNT CONSIDERATION INTEREST=Rs.

AMOUNT= Rs. 6,14,524/-
12,39,900/-

22
 COMPENSATION=
Rs. 3,14,013
*Interest is calculated @ 9.5 % p.a. month-wise for the
period of October 2012 – January 2019
** These expenses paid by the appellant should be granted
in the form of compensation

6. Grounds of Appeal :
That the impugned order dated 28.10.2020 passed in
RERA/CC/538/2019/RERA/AO/133/2019 is being
challenged, inter alia amongst others, on the following grounds.
A. BECAUSE the order dated 28.10.2020 of the Ld.
Adjudicating Officer, RERA is perverse, suffers from
patent illegality, inadequate, flawed, and contrary to
the material available on record and legal position.
The Ld. Adjudicating Officer based his findings on
ignoring vital evidence and failed to consider the
terms of the agreement. The order is grossly
inadequate with effect to the appropriate
compensation/interest granted to the aggrieved
appellant.

B. BECAUSE the order that the appellant is not entitled

to obtain the registered sale deed is erroneous and
unjustified. The project is still ongoing and the
installments made by cash amounts are being held
by the Respondent which should be regarded as
23
 consideration for the agreement. As per the
Agreement, Para 4, the stipulated time period to
obtain the Sale Deed and pay the total amount was
up to the period of 3 (Three) months from the
completion of the Flat. Also, there has been no notice
for cancellation of the agreement by the Respondent.
The agreement for sale can be said to be cancelled
only by the Court of the Registrar as it was a
registered one. Hence the observation that the
appellant has no intention to get executed and
registered Sale Deed in her favor concerning the Flat
no.309 is erroneous and the Respondent is the one
is unwilling and is harassing the appellant.
C. BECAUSE the stipulated interest of a lump sum
amount of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five
Thousand only) is insufficient and miniscule to the
amount of damage/loss incurred by the appellant as
she suffered agony and harassment. Also, she will
not get the flat of same size in same locality at same
rate and her and her husband’s hard earned money
benefitted the Respondent on their expense. As per
Rules 17 and 18 of Bihar Real Estate (Regulation
and Development) Rules, 2017, the rate of interest
payable to the allottee shall be 2% above the
M.C.L.R. of the State Bank of India (presently it is
7.3% for a loan of 3 years or more). The order passed
24
 by the Ld. Adjudicating Officer of granting only Rs.
75,000/- as interest to the appellant is unjust and
inappropriate and is in opposition to the Rules 17
and 18 of Bihar Real Estate (Regulation and
Development) Rules, 2017.
D. BECAUSE as per section 18(1) and 19(4) of the RERA
Act, 2016, the adequate compensation should be
granted in light of economical, mental and physical
harassment of the appellant and should include all
legal costs of the appellant. The order of a
compensation of sums of Rs. 7,000/- hardly covers
anything. The compensation ought to include the
registry of the agreement for sale (Annexure – 1), the
bank loan processing fees (Annexures – 2A & 5) as
well as the legal expenses incurred by the appellant.

7. Relief (s) sought :

In view of the facts mentioned in paragraph 5 above,

the appellant respectfully prays before this Hon’ble Appellate
Tribunal the following reliefs:

25
1.1. To set aside the impugned order dated 28.10.2020
passed by the Ld. BRERA at Patna in complaint case
no. RERA/AO/133/2019 to the extent the prayer of
executing a sale deed in favour of
complainant/appellant w.r.t to flat in question which is
subject matter of agreement to sale dated 09.10.2012
has been rejected and the compensation, interest and
legal expenses have been awarded inadequately and;
1.2. To direct the Respondent no. 1 to execute and register a
Sale Deed in terms of the registered agreement to sale
executed between the Appellant and the Respondent
no.1 on 09.10.2012 at District Registry Office, Patna for
sale of Flat no. 309 in Vision Galaxy Apartment at 3 rd
floor measuring built-up area of 933 sq. ft. with car
parking and proportionate share of the land on
payment of the consideration amount mentioned
therein.
1.3. To grant a higher rate of compensation and interest to
the appellant for the amount deposited to the
Respondent in terms of the provisions envisaged in
section 18 of the Act in the facts and circumstances of
the case.
1.4. Other relief/reliefs for which the appellant is entitled in
the facts and circumstances of the Act.

26
8. Interim order, if prayed for:-
Pending final decision on the appeal, the appellant most
respectfully seeks issue of the following interim order:-

The respondent no.1 may kindly be directed to not

alienate/ sale/dispose of the Flat no. 309 in Vision Galaxy
Apartment at 3rd floor measuring built up area 933 sq. ft.
with car parking and proportionate share of land during the
pendency of this case.

9. Matter not pending with any other court,

etc:

The appellant further declares that the matter

regarding which this appeal has been made is not
pending before any court of law or any other authority or
any other Tribunal (s).

10. Particulars of the fee in terms of sub-rule (1) of

rule 27:

I. Amount: Rs. 5000/-

II. Mode

11. List of enclosures:

i. An attested true copy of the order of the adjudicating
officer against which the appeal is filed
27
ii. Copies of the documents relied upon by
the appellant and referred to in the appeal
iii. An index of the documents

Signature of the
Appellant(s)

Verification

I ANAMIKA W/o VIJAY KUMAR, the appellant do hereby verify

that the contents of paragraphs (1 to 11) are true to my
personal knowledge and belief and that I have not suppressed
any material fact (s).

Place :

28
Date :

Signature of the Appellant(s)

29