Gurugram (Haryana) [India], March 11 (HBTV): The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (H-RERA), Gurugram, has clarified that disputes arising from commercial leasing arrangements fall outside the jurisdiction of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016.
The Authority made the observation while dismissing a complaint related to a unit in the commercial project “AIPL Joy Street” located in Sector 66, Gurugram. It held that matters concerning lease arrangements cannot be adjudicated under RERA, as the Act does not grant the Authority jurisdiction over such disputes.
The case involved a commercial unit booked as a restaurant space on the second floor of the project. An Agreement for Sale was executed in August 2019, and the Occupation Certificate was issued on September 28, 2020. An offer of constructive possession was subsequently issued on October 3, 2020.
The unit was later leased to a gym and fitness centre, and the lease agreement was eventually terminated. During the proceedings, it was noted that the allottee had earlier agreed not to claim rental for the period during which the gym operated.
However, disputes later arose regarding rental expectations and related commercial aspects, prompting the allottee to file a complaint seeking inquiry and penal action under the Act.
While adjudicating the matter, the Authority explained the concept of constructive possession, which is commonly adopted in commercial real estate projects. Under such arrangements, once a project is completed and the Occupation Certificate is obtained, possession is deemed to have been handed over even if the allottee does not take physical possession.
In such cases, the developer may retain leasing rights under the agreed terms and lease the unit to a tenant, while the allottee receives rental benefits as specified in the contract.
H-RERA observed that constructive possession in this case was offered only after the Occupation Certificate was obtained and in accordance with the Agreement for Sale.
After examining the contractual provisions and documents on record, the Authority noted that the grievance raised by the complainant was primarily related to leasing terms, rental expectations, and other commercial considerations.
It emphasised that the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act is intended to regulate obligations related to development, delivery, and compliance, and does not extend to adjudicating purely commercial lease transactions between parties.
The Authority further noted that commercial leasing arrangements typically operate on negotiated commercial terms rather than on the basis of consumer protection concerns, which form the foundation of the RERA framework.
Finding no violation of statutory obligations under Section 11(4)(a) of the Act and no grounds for penal action, the Authority dismissed the complaint and reiterated that disputes related to leasing arrangements fall outside the regulatory scope of the Act.
(ANI)