Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.
Rishab Singh Chandel and Another – Appellants
Versus
Parsvnath Developers Ltd and Another – Respondents
Civil Appeal No 3052 of 2023 (Arising out of SLP (C) No 32400 of 2018)
Decided On : 24-04-2023
[INTEREST] - [CONSUMER DISPUTE REDRESSAL] - [The court determined that the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of payment made to the developer, rather than from the date possession was due, as possession was never granted. This interpretation of the Consumer Protection Act emphasized the rights of consumers to receive timely compensation for delays in service.]
Fact of the Case:
The appellant paid Rs 13.25 lakhs to the developer in 2008 for a property, with possession due by 1 July 2011, which was never delivered.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of payment in 2008, not from the due date of possession in 2011, as possession was not granted.
Issues: Whether the appellant is entitled to interest from the date of payment made to the builder or from the date possession was due.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that interest should be awarded from the date of payment since the developer failed to deliver possession, thus protecting the consumer's rights.
Result: The appeal was disposed of with an order for the developer to pay Rs 3.50 lakhs towards interest for the period between 2 January 2008 and 1 July 2011, in addition to previously awarded interest.
Based on the provided legal document, the key points are as follows:
The court emphasized that consumers are entitled to receive interest from the date of payment when services are not rendered as agreed, reinforcing consumer protection rights. [judgement_subject]
The appellant paid Rs 13.25 lakhs to the developer in 2008 for a property, with possession due by 1 July 2011, which was never delivered. [Fact of the Case]
The court held that the appellant was entitled to interest from the date of payment in 2008, rather than from the date possession was due, since possession was not granted. [Finding of the Court] (!)
The court ordered the developer to pay Rs 3.50 lakhs towards interest for the period between 2 January 2008 and 1 July 2011, in addition to previously awarded interest. [Result] (!)
The court clarified that interest should be awarded from the date of payment made to the developer, not from the date possession was due, given that possession was never handed over. (!) (!)
The order was passed considering the peculiar facts of the case, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. (!) (!)
Pending applications were also disposed of as part of the final order. (!)
Please let me know if you need further analysis or assistance.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [“SCDRC”] directed the respondent to refund the amount deposited by the appellant together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from 1 July 2011 till payment. This order was affirmed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission.
3. Notice was issued by this Court confined to the submission of the appellant that interest has to be awarded from 31 March 2008, the date of payment made to the builder and not from 1 July 2011, as awarded by the SCDRC.
4. Admittedly, the appellant had paid an amount of Rs 13.25 lakhs to the developer in 2008. The date on which possession had to be granted in terms of the agreement was 1 July 2011. Possession has never been handed over.
5. In this backdrop, we are of the considered view that the appellant was entitled to interest from the respective dates on which the payment of consideration was made to the developer and not from 1 July 2011. The date of 1 July 2011 would have been relevant if possession had been handed over to the home buyer which is not the case.
6. In order to resolve the matter finally, we order and direct that the developer shall pay an amount of Rs 3.50 lakhs to the appellant towards the interest liability for the period between 2 January 2008 and 1 July 2011, which shall be over and above the interest which has already been awarded.
7. The above order is being passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, noted above.
8. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.
9. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Consumers are entitled to interest on amounts paid from the date of payment when services are not rendered as agreed, reinforcing consumer protection rights.
Interest on refunds must be calculated from the date of deposit to ensure restitutionary and compensatory relief.
Flat-Buyers Agreement – Developer is bound to handover possession of flat to homebuyer by scheduled date.
Interest – It is well established principle that the interest in the form of interest should be just and equitable and commensurate with the loss and injury.
Just & equitable - the compensation has to be just and equitable, commensurate with the loss and injury suffered.
Parties must adhere to contractual obligations regarding possession and refunds, with applicable interest rates defined by agreements.
The court confirmed the right to interest for delayed possession, noting the absence of force majeure and completion certificate.
The court applied various provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, Sale of Goods Act, Transfer of Property Act, and Stamp Act to determine the rights and obligations of the parties in a dispute ove....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
