NCDRC ORDERS REFUND TO HOMEBUYER FOR DELAY OF 1 YEAR

Recently in the case of Shalabh Nigam vs Orris Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., the Apex Consumer Commission (NCDRC) , giving hope to lakhs of aggrieved homebuyers, has quantified a time period of one year for delayed projects beyond which homebuyers/investors can claim refund from builders.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court and Consumer Courts have repeatedly held that homebuyers cannot be made to wait indefinitely, but the issue relating to when refund can be claimed in case of delay was not clarified. The plea was preferred by a Delhi resident Shalabh Nigam, who booked a flat in 2012 in the luxury housing project, Greenopolis, in Gurgaon being developed by Orris Infrastructure and 3C Company.

The Buyer had made a payment of around Rs 90 lakh against the total cost of around Rs 1 crore. As per the Builder-Buyer Agreement, the flat was to be handed over within 36 months, with a grace period of six months, from the date of allotment. The Buyer approached NCDRC seeking its direction for either refund or time-bound possession of the flat when the builder failed to complete the project within the specified time.

The commission directed the builder to complete the construction and hand over the flat, complete in all respects as per the agreement, by end of September 2019 after obtaining occupancy certificate and to pay compensation at the rate of 6% per year on the total deposit for the delayed period even after handing over Possession. It further directed the builder that in case of non-delivery of flat within the deadline prescribed by commission, NCDRC, the builder will have to refund the entire amount with 10% interest.

The Court further observed -

“It is now established that allottees have the right to ask for refund if possession is inordinately delayed, particularly beyond one year,”

On the contention of the builder that the buyer had discontinued paying installments and if refund is ordered, then there will be a forfeit of 10% of the amount as earnest money, as per the agreed clause, the commission rejected the same stating that the installments were paid up to the 7^th stage and the payment was stopped later as there was no progress in the construction.

Comments

RERA Awards Rs. 65 Lakhs Compensation to Homebuyer for 9 Years Delay in Flat Possession

CA Ramesh Agrawal In a recent decision, the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority (HRERA) has directed a builder to compensate a homebuyer with ₹65 lakh for an inordinate delay of over nine years in handing over a flat in Gurugram. Key Highlights: Background of the Case : The homebuyer had booked a flat in 2013, with the developer promising possession within a stipulated timeframe i.e., 7 th December 2015. However, the possession was delayed by more than nine years. Developer's Justifications : The builder attributed the delay to unforeseen circumstances, including the COVID-19 pandemic, the demise of the chairman of environmental impact assessment (EIA) committee, and inadequate water supply. H-RERA's Verdict : After reviewing the case, HRERA rejected the developer's justifications, deeming them insufficient to warrant such a prolonged delay. The authority emphasized that the reasons cited did not qualify as fo...

RERA SHOULD BE ABOLISHED - SUPREME COURT

CA Ramesh Agrawal On 12 th February 2026, the Supreme Court expressed serious dissatisfaction with the functioning of the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA), indicating that the institution, should be abolished in its current form. In this regard please note: - The Hon. Supreme Court strongly criticized the current functioning & working of RERA and observed that RERA should be abolished in its existing form & there is a need to rethink the role being played by it. The Apex court urged all States to examine who is actually benefiting from RERA’s functioning. The Bench comprising of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that RERA is helping defaulting builders rather than effectively protecting homebuyers or fulfilling its intended objectives. The Bench emphasized that States should revisit the original purpose behind the enactment of the RERA Act. As quoted by Bar and Bench, CJI Surya Kant stated “ All States should now think of...

Supreme Court Ruling Warns Homebuyers: Registration Is Not Ownership

CA Ramesh Agrawal The Supreme Court in a significant ruling has stated that only registering a property does not make someone its legal owner. The judgement, delivered in the Mahnoor Fatima Imran vs M/s Visweswara Infrastructure Private Limited case, has direct implications for millions of Indian homebuyers and investors. If someone has bought a property solely based on a registered sale deed, then have a look at the below points. Understanding the Law: Registration Does Not Equal Ownership “Ownership of a property comprises several aspects, of which registration is only one,” says Mr. Harsh Parikh, partner at a Law Firm, Khaitan & Co. Under Indian law, properties above Rs. 100 require registration, but that’s not all. “A buyer must also prove full payment, possession, and custody of original title documents,” he explains. Chairman and Director of Prime Developments, Mr. Rakesh Malhotra stated that “Registration provides prima facie evidence of a transaction, but it doesn’t c...

RERA Master

Search This Blog