Supreme Court directs DLF Home developer to pay compensation for delay in possession to Capital Greens Flat Buyers Association

 

Facts

1.     That there was a substantial delay on the part of the

Developer in handing over possession of the apartments a claim for compensation for delay in handing over possession of the flats was made.

2.     The complainants also specifically challenged the

Recovery of parking and club charges by the developer.

Defence by Developer

The appellants in their defence to the complaints contended that as

a result of force majeure conditions, they were prevented from achieving

completion of their contract.

(i) Delay in the approval of building plans;

 

(ii) Issuance of stop work orders as a result of fatal accidents during the

Course of construction.

NCDR ORDER

·        The OP is not entitled to car parking charges.& club charges. The car parking charges and club charges wherever already paid to the developer shall be refunded to the concerned allottee within three months from the date of order  failing which the said charges shall carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of  order, till the date of refund.

·        Alottees shall be entitled to early payment rebate and timely payment

Rebate which were offered by the developer

·        Pay compensation in the form of simple interest @7% per annum from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the allottees.

·        The conveyance deed in favour of the allottees shall be executed within three months from today, subject to payment of

outstanding dues, if any

·        In CC/351/2015 and CC/2047/2016, the developer shall pay

Rs.50,000/- as the cost of litigation in each complaint whereas

In the other consumer complaints, the developer shall pay

Rs.46, 000/- as the cost of litigation in each

 

Arguments before Supreme Court

 

1.  Force mejore

i) Delay in the approval of building plans;

(ii) Issuance of stop work orders as a result of fatal accidents during the

Course of construction

2.  (i) exit offers were given to the flat buyers on two occasions

When the developer became aware of the fact that there was a delay beyond

The contractual period of thirty-six months and the purchasers were offered

Refunds of the consideration together with interest at the rate of 9% per

Annum;

(ii) 45% of the flat buyers in the project have sold away their

Apartments;

(iii) The flat buyers have the benefit of an appreciation in the

Capital value of the apartments purchased;

(iv) The developer has extended the benefit of timely payment and goodwill rebates to the flat purchasers.

 

Supreme Court held-

 

·        Force mejore clause not acceptable on both counts-non approval and direction to stop work. Non approval should have been foreseen by builder when taking up such project. Direction to stop construction by the state was done because of accidents taking place on the site for safety negligence ,this was due to insufficient safety measures and due to builders default  

·        Mere offer to exit option with interest at 9% would not disentitle the flat purchasers from claiming compensation

·        Compensation at 6% rate of interest on the money held from the expected date for delivery of possession till the date on which the possession was actually offered to the allottees.

 

 

 

 

 

Previous

Next