Skip to main content

Strength to CPA: Exit deals don’t negate Right to Compensation, rules Supreme Court 

 A Real Estate Developer cannot deal with homebuyers Rights to Claim Compensation for delays in the completion of their apartments by merely offering refunds or some other exit option, the Supreme Court has ruled.


In the order that could strengthen the rights of homebuyers under the Consumer Protection Act, the court has held that the right to claim compensation is independent of schemes offered by developers that give an option to the buyers to rescind their purchase.


It also held that the damages to a Consumer can be over and above the amount mentioned in the developer-buyer agreement, defined as the contractual rate of compensation for delays.


In its order last week, a bench of the Apex Court headed by Justice Dhananjay Y Chandrachud, highlighted that “a genuine flat buyer wants a roof over the head” and therefore, schemes offering them a refund of what they had paid to date would not be sufficient.


“For a genuine flat buyer, who has booked an apartment in the project not as an investor or financier, but for the purpose of purchasing a family home, a mere offer of refund would not detract from the entitlement to claim compensation,” held the bench, which also included Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Indira Banerjee.The developer, said the bench, cannot assert that buyers who continue to be committed to the agreement for purchase of the flat give up their right to adequate compensation.


“Mere refund of consideration together with interest would not provide a just recompense to a genuine flat buyer, who desires possession and remains committed to the project. It is for each buyer to either accept the offer of the developer and opt out, or continue with the agreement for purchase of the flat,” it said.


The Court also addressed another contention regarding the appreciation of the capital value of the flats with the passage of time, stating that this factor could only be one of the considerations while determining the quantum of damages but that it cannot deprive the consumers of a just and fair compensation.


The order came as the bench dismissed DLF Home Developers Limited’s appeal against compensation to the flat buyers of the Capital Greens project in Delhi. The developer, through senior advocate Pinaki Misra, challenged the order of the National Consumer Commission, arguing the delay in completion of the apartments was due to certain reasons beyond the control of the developer.


Misra added that the developer also offered to its buyers refunds of the amount paid by them, together with interest at the rate of 9% per annum.


Representing the home buyers, senior advocate Shyam Divan defended the consumer commission’s order, directing DLF to pay compensation in the form of simple interest at the rate of 7% annually from the promised date of delivery for possession till the date on which the possession is actually offered.Affirming the order in favour of the home buyers, the bench said that “the fact that the developer offered an exit option with interest at 9% would not disentitle the flat purchasers from claiming compensation.”


The other argument by DLF, with respect to unmanageable circumstances, was also rejected with the court noting that if fatal accidents at the site stalled the work while it was found that accidents took place due to a developer’s laxity in adhering to safety norms, the flat buyers cannot be made to suffer.


“The flat buyers had to suffer on account of a substantial delay on the part of the appellants. In such a situation, they cannot be constrained to the compensation of ₹10 per square foot, provided by the agreements for flat purchase,” clarified the court, commenting on the contractual rate.However, in accordance with a previous ruling on the rate of interest, the bench ordered that the compensation on account of delay will be 6% per annum instead of 7%.


“We welcome the order of the Supreme Court because it will empower the thousands of homebuyers who have been suffering for a long time at the hands of the developers, who have delayed their projects for many years, and still denying justified compensation with refund of the investment. But we hope that this order will be implemented at the ground by the authorities to safeguard the rights of the homebuyers,” said Abhishek Kumar, president of Noida Extension Flat Owners Welfare Association.


“We will look into this order in detail and then figure out as to how it will impact the real estate sector ahead. But any order that gives power to the consumer helps the sector as it restores the faith of the homebuyer...So we hope this order will positively impact the realty sector,” said Subodh Goyal, secretary of the western Uttar Pradesh chapter of the Confederation of Real Estate Developers Association of India.The order has been issued by a bench comprising of Justice Dhananjay Y Chandrachud, Justice Indu Malhotra and Justice Indira Banerjee on 14-12-2020.\

ADVOCATES AND LEGAL CONSULTANTS"
















We are India’s Leading Law Firm
















“The firm has always strives to create and implement innovative and effective methods of providing cost-effective, quality representation and services for our clients and will continue to meet and exceed the expectations of our valued clients.”
































–    DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA (ADVOCATE, FOUNDER-LEXIS AND COMPANY).
































Get in Touch
















LEXIS AND COMPANY.
































C/O: DR ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA.
































OFFICE: A1B/26, JANAKPURI, GROUND FLOOR,
































NEW DELHI,, DELHI, 110058.
































INDIA.
































lexisandcompany@gmail.com
































CALL: +91-9830333388.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996)

     POONAM VERMA VS. ASHWIN PATEL & ORS (10 MAY, 1996) INTRODUCTION The medical profession is perhaps the noblest profession among any remaining professions in India. For a patient, the specialist resembles God. What's more, God is trustworthy. In any case, that is the patient's opinion. As a general rule, doctors are individuals. Furthermore, to fail is human. Doctors might submit a slip-up. Doctors might be careless. The care staff might be imprudent. Two demonstrations of carelessness might bring about a lot more pressing issue. It very well might be because of gross carelessness. The sky is the limit. In such a situation, it is basic to figure out who was careless, and under what conditions. For this situation, the Supreme Court separated carelessness, impulsiveness, and foolishness. An individual is supposed to be a careless individual when he/she unintentionally submits a demonstration of exclusion and disregards a positive obligation that he/she ought to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur ...
1 comment
Read more

Effects of Non-Registration

 Effects of Non-Registration The Companies Act, 2013 evidently highlights that the main essential for any organization to turn into a company is to get itself registered. A company cannot come into existence until it gets registered. But no such obligation has been imposed for firms by the Indian Partnership Act, 1932. If a firm is not registered it does not cease to be called as a firm, it still exists in the eyes law. Certainly, such a big advantage is not absolute but is subjected to a lot of limitations which we will study further. Non-registration of a firm simply means that the business skips the formalities of incorporation and ceases to exist in the eyes of the law. section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 deals with the procedure of incorporation. Likewise, the meaning of non-registration is the exact opposite of registration, meaning when a firm does not go through the procedure of incorporation or start carrying on activities without getting registered. Effects of ...
Post a Comment
Read more