SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(SC) 777

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Bela M Trivedi, JJ.
M/s IREO Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Aloke Anand and Others – Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 180 & 268 of 2022
Decided On : 21-01-2022

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the period for delivery of possession commences from the date the Fire NOC is granted, and the developer's failure to provide promised amenities justifies a refund with interest.

Headnote:

COPRA - Consumer Protection Act - Section 23 - 2(1)(d) of COPRA, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016, Haryana Fire Service Act 2009 - The court discussed the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act 2016, and Haryana Fire Service Act 2009. It interpreted the clauses of the Apartment Buyers Agreement and the Building Approval to determine the period for delivery of possession. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of these acts and sections, particularly in relation to the calculation of the period for delivery of possession and the obligations of the developer.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant, a developer, was challenged by the allotees of its housing project for not delivering possession of the apartments as per the Apartment Buyers Agreement. The first respondent sought a direction for possession and compensation for delayed possession. The NCDRC ordered a refund with interest, relying on previous decisions and the provisions of the Real Estate Act.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appellant failed to deliver possession as per the agreement and upheld the NCDRC's decision for a refund with interest, considering the amenities promised but not provided. The court rejected the appellant's arguments regarding the period for delivery of possession and the obligation for a refund.

Issues: The issues involved the calculation of the period for delivery of possession, the obligations of the developer under the Apartment Buyers Agreement, and the entitlement to a refund with interest.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the period for delivery of possession would commence from the date the Fire NOC was granted, and the developer's failure to provide promised amenities justified the refund with interest. The court also rejected the appellant's arguments regarding the period for delivery of possession and the obligation for a refund.

Final Decision: The appeals were dismissed, affirming the NCDRC's judgment for a refund with interest, as the developer failed to deliver possession and provide promised amenities.

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J.

1. The appeals under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act 19861[“COPRA”] arise from the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission2[“NCDRC”] on complaints which were instituted against the appellant by the allotees of its housing project called ‘SKYON’, located at Golf Course Extension Road in Sector 60 of Gurgaon, Haryana3[“Project”]. The appellant advertised that the Project offered state of the art facilities such as home automation devices, Wi-Fi and high-end video door security systems in each apartment.

2. The Building Plans for the Project were approved by the Directorate of Town and Country Planning, Haryana4[“TCP Haryana”] on 27 September 2011, subject to certain terms and conditions to be fulfilled by the appellant. Thereafter, on 31 July 2012, the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority, Haryana granted an Environment Clearance for the Project.

3. The appellant submitted an application to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Gurgaon5[“CMC Gurgaon”], for approval of the Fire Fighting Scheme for the Project on 16 January 2012. The CMC Gurgaon granted the approval on 25 September 20136[“Fire NOC”].

4. On 26 August 2016, the Occupation Certificate was issued by the Director General of TCP Haryana in respect of Tower D of the Project. Further, on 14 September 2017, the Occupation Certificate was issued in respect of Tower B of the Project.

5. Other than these common facts in relation to the Project, the appeals arise from separate complaints and have distinct facts. However, they raise a common issue. Hence, we shall set out the facts of the lead appeal (Civil Appeal No 180 of 2022) in detail.

6. In Civil Appeal No 180 of 2022, the first respondent filed a booking application for an apartment in the Project on 22 December 2010. An amount of Rs 15,00,000/- was paid as booking amount by a cheque dated 14 October 2010.

7. The appellant issued a letter offering allotment to the first respondent on 14 January 2011, by which the appellant allotted an apartment having a tentative super area of 2809 sq ft, bearing No B3203, Floor 31 in Tower B of the Project. The appellant and the first respondent entered into an Apartment Buyers Agreement7[“ABA”] on 14 February 2012.

8. Due to the apartment not being handed over in time by the appellant, the first respondent filed a consumer complaint8[Consumer Complaint No 1277 of 2017] before the NCDRC on 3 May 2017.

    The reliefs claimed in the complaint were as follows:

    “i. Direct the Opposite Parties to handover possession of Unit to the Complainant, complete in all respects and in conformity with the Allotment Letter and Apartment Buyers' Agreement, with all additional facilities and as per quality standards promised and execute all necessary and required documents in respect of the said apartment in favour of the Complainant within 6 months of this petition being filed before this Hon'ble Commission or as directed by this Commission;

    ii. Direct the Opposite Parties for an immediate 100% refund of the total principal amount of Rs. 2,23,91,480/- (Rupees Two Crore Twenty Three Lakh Ninety One Thousand Four Hundred and Eighty Only) paid by the Complainant, along with a penal interest of 18% per annum from the date of the receipt of the payments made to the Opposite Parties, in case the Opposite Parties cannot deliver or fail to deliver the absolute, complete and final physical possession of the flat within a period of 6 months of this petition being filed before this Hon'ble Commission or as directed by this Hon'ble Commission;

    iii. Direct the Opposite Parties to pay a delayed possession compensation equal to interest @ 18% per annum on the amount deposited by the Complainant with the opposite Parties, with effect from March 2015 i.e. date when possession was promised, till the date of actual possession is handed over by the Opposite Parties along with all necessary documents and common areas and facilities as promised during the i

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top