D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, HEMANT GUPTA
Kolkata West International City Pvt Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Devasis Rudra – Respondent
What is the remedy if there is unreasonable delay in possession in a Buyer''s Agreement? What is the appropriate rate of interest on refunds awarded in a consumer dispute for delayed possession? What are the consequences of a one-sided clause in a Buyer''s Agreement regarding possession and interest?
Key Points: - The court held that unreasonable delay in possession can justify refund of money with interest. (!) (!) - The Court modified the NCDRC order to award interest at 9% per annum, instead of 12%. (!) - The Buyer''s Agreement clause regarding possession and interest was found to be one-sided and indicative of unfairness. (!) (!) - Despite seeking possession as primary relief, refund of money with interest was justified given seven-year delay. (!) - The SCDRC/NCDRC awards for refund and compensation were upheld with modification to interest rate. (!) (!) - The possession completion certificate was received much later (2016), far beyond the extended possession date. (!) (!) - The appeal disposed of with no order as to costs. (!) - The respondent had filed a consumer complaint in 2011 seeking possession or refund with interest and compensation. (!) - The court noted that a reasonable period for awaiting possession cannot be indefinite. (!) - The amount deposit and distribution per court directions were to be adjusted from appellant's deposited funds. (!)
JUDGMENT
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J. - Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises from the judgment dated 21 November 2016 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ("NCDRC").
3. A Buyer's Agreement dated 2 July 2007 was entered into between the appellant and the respondent.
4. The respondent paid an amount of Rs. 39,29,280 in 2006 in terms of a letter of allotment dated 20 September 2006. The agreement between the parties envisaged that the appellant would hand over possession of a Row House to the respondent by 31 December 2008 with a grace period of a further six months ending on 30 June 2009.
5. The respondent filed a consumer complaint before the West Bengal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ("SCDRC") in 2011 praying for possession of the Row House and in the alternative for the refund of the amount paid to the developer together with interest at 12% per annum. Compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs was also claimed.
6. The SCDRC allowed the complaint by directing the appellant to refund the moneys paid by the respondent together with interest at 12% per annum and compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs. The NCDRC has modified this order by reducing the compensation from Rs. 5 l
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.