The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), chaired by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, has found Raheja Developers responsible for failing to provide timely service. The ruling stipulates that delay compensation at 6% per annum should be granted in addition to any compensation already specified in the Builder-Buyer Agreement.
Case Summary
A complaint was lodged by 11 individuals who had booked units in the “Raheja Shilas” project in Gurgaon, based on various advertisements and promises made by Raheja Developers. After making significant payments, the complainants received allotment letters and signed Flat Buyer’s Agreements. According to the agreement, possession was to be delivered within 24 months, with an additional 6-month grace period. However, possession was not provided on time, prompting the complainants to approach the National Commission. They requested a 12% annual interest rate for delayed possession until handover, ₹5,00,000 for mental distress, and ₹1,00,000 for litigation expenses.
Developer’s Defense
Raheja Developers informed all allottees, including the complainants, that no compensation would be given for delays related to infrastructure or possession, as specified in the application form and agreement. Despite being aware of these terms, the complainants proceeded with their bookings. The developer attributed the delays to government policies, infrastructure issues, and legal constraints, asserting that the agreement’s terms were fair and binding. The construction was completed, but the Occupancy Certificates were delayed due to external factors. The developer argued that the issues were contractual and should be resolved in civil court, claiming no negligence under the Consumer Protection Act. They also contended that the complaint was time-barred and that the complainants, already property owners, did not qualify as consumers.
NCDRC Observations
The National Commission noted that the primary request from the complainants was for possession, with a refund as a secondary option. The developer assured that the Occupancy Certificate (OC) would be obtained within five months and possession would be handed over within six months. They agreed to provide delay compensation at a rate of 6% per annum, or refund the principal amount with 9% interest if they failed to do so. The complainants, referring to previous cases such as Charu Sharma Vs. Raheja Developers Ltd. and Santosh Narasimha Murthy & Ors. Vs. Mantri Castles Private Limited & Anr., argued for a higher delay compensation rate of 8% per annum or 6% plus the rate specified in the Builder-Buyer Agreement. The developer, citing Raj Kumar Mittal & Ors. Vs. Raheja Developers Limited, advocated for the 6% rate.
The NCDRC upheld the complaint and directed the developer to obtain a valid OC within four months and to deliver possession within six months. The ruling also required delay compensation at 6% per annum in addition to any compensation already provided in the agreement. The developer was further instructed to pay ₹25,000 for litigation costs.
Posted and reproduced in Public Interest by
Adv. Sulaiman Bhimani Legal Consultant
Expert in RERA & Consumer Matters, Co-operative Scty Matters,
Deem Conveyance, Family Matters, and Property Disputes.
Human and Civil Rights Campaigner
President Citizens Justice Forum https://citizensjusticeforum.in
YouTube Channel https://tinyurl.com/CitizensJusticeForum
NEW CHANNEL FOR STOCK MARKET https://tinyurl.com/GreenWa