Mohan Khanna Vs. Jai Prakash Associate Ltd.
Case Number: M. A. No. 209/2024
In a recent ruling, the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, led by Mr. Subhash Chandra, stated that a builder is not obligated to compensate for late delivery beyond the actual possession offer date.
The case got initiated when the complainant, who had booked a flat with Jaiprakash Associates/builder, claimed a delay in receiving possession. The complainant asked for compensation for the delay and a refund of the amounts charged with interest. The commission approved the consumer’s complaint and directed the builder to compensate at a 6% annual rate on the deposited amount for the delay and pay litigation costs of Rs.50,000. The complainant then challenged the promised and actual possession dates.
The builder defended itself by stating that the possession offer date was 25.10.2016, and based on a completion certificate, a sub-lease was executed between the parties on 16.03.2017. Therefore, the actual possession date was 16.03.2017.
Upon reviewing the case, the commission found the crux of the matter to be the promised possession date versus the actual offer of possession date. According to the agreement, the possession date was July 2014, while the possession was offered on 25.10.2016. Given this timeline, the commission felt the Plaintiff’s delayed compensation claim until 23.04.2018 needed revision. The Supreme Court has previously ruled in Samruddhi Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction Pvt. Ltd. that the builder’s obligation to pay damages ends once a valid offer of possession is made. The commission underlined that with the possession offer on 25.10.2016, based on the completion certificate dated 20.07.2016, and the handover on 16.03.2017, the builder’s obligation for delayed possession compensation ended on 25.10.2016.
Ultimately, the commission confirmed the complainant’s entitlement to a refund due to the delay in handing over the booked apartment. It ordered the builder to provide compensation from the promised handing over date, i.e., 19.04.2014, to the actual offer of possession date, i.e., 23.04.2018, at an annual rate of 6% on the amount deposited as on 19.07.2014, along with litigation costs of Rs.50,000.
In summary, this judgment underlines the importance of adhering to the agreed timelines in real estate transactions and reinforces that consumers have rights and recourses available when these timelines are not met. It serves as a reminder to builders to be mindful of their obligations and to consumers to understand their legal rights.
