Legal Provisions Involved: Sections 2(1)(c), 2(1)(g), 2(1)(o), 2(1)(r), 12, 14, and 22 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Judgement by: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan
Facts
The Respondents booked residential flats in Parsvnath Exotica, and paid nearly the entire sale consideration. Despite payment, the Appellant failed to deliver possession within the contractual period of 36 months. The NCDRC directed the Appellant to complete construction, obtain the Occupancy Certificate, and pay compensation at 8% per annum interest.
Key Legal Provisions
Sections 2(1)(c), 2(1)(g), 2(1)(o), 2(1)(r), 12, 14, and 22 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Issues raised
- Whether the NCDRC exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding compensation beyond contractual terms.
- Whether failure to obtain Occupancy Certificate constitutes deficiency in service.
Arguments of the case
The Appellant argued that the delay was caused by industry-wide difficulties including labour shortages and approval delays beyond their control while the Respondent argued that despite paying nearly the entire consideration, possession was not delivered within the stipulated period. The Appellant failed to obtain the requisite Occupancy Certificate, constituting deficiency in service.
Judgement
The Court held that statutory powers of consumer forums are not curtailed by one-sided contractual terms, and compensation at 8% per annum was just and reasonable.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
