The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) has approved a\nmaximum of one percent brokerage on sale and purchase of property in the state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On Tuesday, taking cognizance of the complaints that property dealers are\ncharging arbitrary commission from both sellers and buyers, bench headed by\nHRERA Chairman Sh. K.K. Khandelwal and member S.C. Kush arrived at the decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For registered real estate projects, it has been decided to issue\nrestraint orders to all promoters and brokers to refrain from charging\ncommission more than what is prescribed in the Haryana Regulation of Property\nDealers and Consultants Rules of 2009 under the Haryana Regulation of Property\nDealers and Consultants Act, 2008.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Rule 10 provides one per cent commission on agreed consideration value\nto be paid by the seller and purchaser of the property i.e. half percent by\neach on the finalization of the deal as per their agreement entered in the\nregister of the dealer under valid receipt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sh. Khandelwal said that property dealer and brokers in connivance with\nthe promoters are charging more than prescribed commission both from sellers\nand buyers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The HRERA Chairman said that certain real estate agent and brokers were\nalso involved in issuance of misleading advertisements for upcoming projects.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

He said that it has been\nnoticed that some brokers and property dealers are indulging in sale of\nproperty in unauthorized colonies as well. A vigil is kept on such brokers so\nthat their registrations are cancelled and criminal as well as civil action, as\nper law, must be initiated against them. It is mandatory for the brokers to\nkeep the copies of relevant approvals from authorities and sanction plans,\nspecifications, brochures etc. of projects, where deals are facilitated by them.\nHRERA\nwas in the process of prescribing a code of conduct for property dealers to\nmake sure that they abide by such norms so that there are no unfair trade\npractices, he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Khandelwal also said “We have\nnoticed that some property dealers\/agents do not have necessary documents. They\nshall also be penalized, including cancellation of their registration with the\nAuthority along with recommendation to the Deputy Commissioners concerned for\nwithdrawal of their licenses\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

  The code of ethics would prescribe not only additional books of accounts to be maintained by the property dealers of commission charged as per the law and also records of transactions which may be perused by the authority in case of any dispute arise between the buyers and the brokers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For latest news on RERA, log onto https:\/\/www.ethicallegal.in<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For your HRERA related grievances or queries, do not hesitate to contact RERA Lawyer in Faridabad, Gurugram <\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

or the city where your property exists.<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) has approved a maximum of one percent brokerage on sale and purchase of property in the state. On Tuesday, taking cognizance of the complaints that property dealers are charging arbitrary commission from both sellers and buyers, bench headed by HRERA Chairman Sh. K.K. Khandelwal and member S.C. KushRead more about HRERA APPROVES BROKERAGE OF 1% FOR REAL ESTATE<\/span>[…]<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=327"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":335,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/327\/revisions\/335"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=327"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=327"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.ethicallegal.in\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=327"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}