Delays and defaults are common in real estate development. Flat buyers are usually abandoned, where the developer has delayed the delivery of the units built constantly. This led the government to enact the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act in 2016. This law provides for appropriate compensation in the form of interest in the event of a delay on the part of the promoter. Even before this decree, buyers of flat products would invoke the remedial measures provided by the Consumer Protection Act. Such a case has reached the merits of the court. The court decided on a few important issues that would also apply to RERA. The decision in question in the case of Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan – Aleya Sultana – Ors vs. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. Civil Complaint 6239/2019, was decided on 24 August 2020.
It stipulates that the courts are not limited by the conditions provided by the agreement of the owner, while awarding compensation to the purchaser of the dwelling. 45. It is apparent from the two expert certificates of 26 July 2013 and 9 August 2014 that taxes, including interest, have been recovered. The owner acknowledged that he had « not properly laid off » his tax obligations for a period of 36 months between 2011-12 and 2013-14 and that, on 25 March 2015, tax levies had been paid with interest and fines. It was therefore insisted that interest liability, which resulted from the promoter`s negligence in the timely execution of the tax debt, could not be limited to purchasers. While homebuyers did not recover the taxes they paid, the high-level court awarded them a higher compensation. 24. If the developer has not complied with the contractual obligation to make the dwelling available to a home buyer within a contractually agreed time frame, there is a default. There is a gap, defect or inadequacy in the nature and nature of the service that must be performed under the contract with respect to the service. The term « service » in section 2, paragraph 1, point o) refers to a service of any kind made available to potential users, including the provision of facilities related to the construction of housing. In accordance with Section 14 (1)e), the responsibility of the Consumer Forum extends to the suggestion of the opposing party to remedy the service shortage in question.
The jurisdiction that has been entrusted to the elimination of a non-benefit is compensation in lieu of the delay taken by the promoter beyond the time in which the possession had to be handed over to the purchaser. Apartment buyers suffer and harass as a result of the developer`s failure. Homebuyers provide legitimate assessments of the future evolution of their lives on the basis of housing that has been purchased for use and employment. These legitimate expectations are met when, as in this case, the promoter is guilty of a delay of years in the performance of a contractual obligation. The proponent`s assertion that the purchaser of the dwelling is limited by the terms of the agreed rate, regardless of the nature or extent of the delay, would lead to a miscarriage of justice.