A division bench comprising Justices UU Lalit and Vineet Saran while clarifying that the time for allotment of flat to a homebuyer has to be considered not from the date of the registration of the property but from the date of the buyer agreement, they also observed that the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 does not preclude the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) or the Consumer Forum from entertaining any complaint under Consumer Protection (CP) Act.
Brief Facts of the case (M/S Imperial Structures Ltd vs Anil Patni and another)
Back in 2011, a housing project was being developed by the developer in Gurugram and all the complainants had executed the builder-buyer agreements by booking their respective apartments by paying the booking amount. The possession was to be handed over within 42 months from the date of the agreement.
However, even after payment of substantial amounts, the project was not completed which prompted a group of buyers to approach the NCDRC in 2017. Sometime later in November 2017, the builder got the project approved by RERA.
(The Builder Buyer Agreement in the case was executed on November 30, 2013. The project was registered under the RERA on November 17, 2017)
The NCDRC allowed the complaint, ordering the builder to pay the compensation.
The builder approached the Supreme Court, challenging the NCDRC judgment, contending that the RERA registration was valid till December 2020, hence the project cannot be said to be delayed. They also maintained that the apartments having been booked for commercial purposes, therefore, the buyers would not come within the definition of “the consumer” under Section 2(d) of the Consumer Protection Act.
The complainant's counsel stated that since no plea was taken before the Commission that the Project was registered under the RERA Act or about the effect of the RERA Act. No such plea was taken even in the appeal memo. Consequently, it would not be open to the Appellant to raise any submissions about the applicability of the RERA Act
The Supreme Court observed that the RERA act provides a remedy to anyone who wishes to withdraw from the project or claim return on his investment and held that the remedy so provided under the RERA Act to them is not the only and exclusive modality to raise a grievance. The apex court while upholding the judgement of NCDRC further held that-
As promised, the construction should have been completed in 42 months. The period had expired well before the Project was registered under the provisions of the RERA Act. Merely because the registration under the RERA Act is valid till 31.12.2020 does not mean that the entitlement of the concerned allottees to maintain an action stands deferred. It is relevant to note that even for the purposes of Section 18, the period has to be reckoned in terms of the agreement and not the registration.
Therefore, the court held that the entitlement of the Complainants must be considered in the light of the terms of the Builder Buyer Agreements and was rightly dealt with by the Commission.
Read Judgement here