NCDRC holds Sushma Buildtech Liable for deficiency in service
Real Estate

NCDRC holds Sushma Buildtech Liable for deficiency in service

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), under the presidency of AVM J. Rajendra, ruled that builders cannot compel buyers to accept possession of property after significant delays. The commission affirmed the buyer's right to either accept delayed possession or seek appropriate compensation. The complainant had booked a flat with Sushma Buildtech, and a Flat Buyers Agreement was executed specifying possession within 30 months (24 months plus a 6-month grace period). Despite receiving 97% of the sale price, the builder failed to deliver possession within the agreed timeframe. Dissatisfied with the delay, the complainant filed a consumer complaint with the Punjab State Commission, seeking relief.

The State Commission ruled in favour of the complainant, ordering the builder to compensate at the rate of ?5 per sq. ft. per month of the flat's super area from the stipulated delivery date until possession, along with 6% annual simple interest on the deposited amount of Rs 5.43. Additionally, litigation costs of Rs 65,000 were awarded. Aggrieved by this decision, the builder appealed to the National Commission. The builder contended that the complaint lacked pecuniary jurisdiction, arguing that the complainants, who owned another property and purchased the flat for speculative purposes, did not qualify as 'consumers' under the law. The builder denied any service deficiency, citing project development challenges such as labour shortages, sand scarcity, and demonetization. They maintained that all necessary approvals were in place as stipulated in the Apartment Buyer's Agreement. The NCDRC observed that the complainants had paid Rs 6.42 million towards the flat, as evidenced by receipts. Despite fulfilling their financial obligations, the builder failed to meet the possession deadline agreed upon in the contract. Emphasising the rights of homebuyers, the commission referenced precedents such as Emmar MGF Land Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Amit Puri and Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Govindan Raghvan, affirming that buyers have the right to seek compensation for possession delays.

Modifying the State Commission's order, the National Commission directed the builder to pay 6% simple interest on the deposited amount of Rs 6.42 million from the date the flat was due for possession until delivery. Additionally, Rs 100,000 was awarded to the complainants for litigation expenses.

(Source: Live Law)

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), under the presidency of AVM J. Rajendra, ruled that builders cannot compel buyers to accept possession of property after significant delays. The commission affirmed the buyer's right to either accept delayed possession or seek appropriate compensation. The complainant had booked a flat with Sushma Buildtech, and a Flat Buyers Agreement was executed specifying possession within 30 months (24 months plus a 6-month grace period). Despite receiving 97% of the sale price, the builder failed to deliver possession within the agreed timeframe. Dissatisfied with the delay, the complainant filed a consumer complaint with the Punjab State Commission, seeking relief. The State Commission ruled in favour of the complainant, ordering the builder to compensate at the rate of ?5 per sq. ft. per month of the flat's super area from the stipulated delivery date until possession, along with 6% annual simple interest on the deposited amount of Rs 5.43. Additionally, litigation costs of Rs 65,000 were awarded. Aggrieved by this decision, the builder appealed to the National Commission. The builder contended that the complaint lacked pecuniary jurisdiction, arguing that the complainants, who owned another property and purchased the flat for speculative purposes, did not qualify as 'consumers' under the law. The builder denied any service deficiency, citing project development challenges such as labour shortages, sand scarcity, and demonetization. They maintained that all necessary approvals were in place as stipulated in the Apartment Buyer's Agreement. The NCDRC observed that the complainants had paid Rs 6.42 million towards the flat, as evidenced by receipts. Despite fulfilling their financial obligations, the builder failed to meet the possession deadline agreed upon in the contract. Emphasising the rights of homebuyers, the commission referenced precedents such as Emmar MGF Land Ltd. & Ors. Vs. Amit Puri and Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. Vs. Govindan Raghvan, affirming that buyers have the right to seek compensation for possession delays. Modifying the State Commission's order, the National Commission directed the builder to pay 6% simple interest on the deposited amount of Rs 6.42 million from the date the flat was due for possession until delivery. Additionally, Rs 100,000 was awarded to the complainants for litigation expenses. (Source: Live Law)

Next Story
Resources

Mahindra selects ABB’s PixelPaint for premium paint options

ABB’s innovative PixelPaint technology has been selected by Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M), India’s leading SUV manufacturer, for its new electric vehicle paint facility. The technology, which uses an award-winning paint head similar to an inkjet printer, will begin serial production in 2025. “Our revolutionary PixelPaint technology can apply large areas of uniform color as well as the tiniest details with complete accuracy, without delaying the production line or the need for manual intervention,” said Joerg Reger, Managing Director of ABB Robotics Automotive Business Line. “By d..

Next Story
Infrastructure Transport

PJTL Lenders Approve Rs 10.20 billion One-Time Settlement

Lenders to the heavily indebted Panipat Jalandhar NH 1 Tollway (PJTL) have agreed to a one-time settlement for their Rs 34 billion dues. They accepted a Rs 10.20 billion all-cash offer from the promoters, the Canada-based Roadis Group and Hyderabad's Soma Enterprises, resulting in a 30% recovery, according to sources familiar with the deal. The account had been affected by farmers' agitation in the area for several years and was eventually declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA). Several months ago, the National Asset Reconstruction Company (NARCL) had proposed to take over the debt, but the p..

Next Story
Infrastructure Urban

Capgemini to invest Rs 10 billion in new Chennai facility

Capgemini revealed plans to develop a new facility in Chennai, committing to invest approximately Rs 10 billion over the next three years. The IT and consulting services firm indicated that the 5,000-seat facility in Chennai is expected to be completed by April 2027. The campus will incorporate advanced energy and water-efficient technologies, utilize recycled materials, and implement rainwater harvesting during construction. Capgemini noted that the new facility is intended to become a prime destination for top-tier talent in southern India. It will be equipped with state-of-the-art IT in..

Hi There!

Now get regular updates from CW Magazine on WhatsApp!

Click on link below, message us with a simple hi, and SAVE our number

You will have subscribed to our Construction News on Whatsapp! Enjoy

+91 81086 03000

Join us Telegram