A habitual problem faced by a home buyer is delay in the possession of the home. Builder and developers of a project always carries allowable and reasonable justification for delay in handling over the possession of a newly constructed flat or home. Usually, delay in possession means when the developer fails to handover the possession to the buyers on the prescribed time. There are numerous and uncountable litigation regarding complaints for delay in possession by the developers even after full payments of the flats by the allottees. An allottee or a home buyer puts up and invest all his saving just to buy a home for him and his family but most of the time he ends up disappointed by the lame excuses of the builders and developers. . Sometimes a home buyer even takes a loan to buy a home but due to these situations he/she feels so burdened to either pay back to bank or to take legal action upon the buyer, as it both costs him so much of financial loss and energy.
A person who falls under these circumstances can seek help from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority established under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016. The Central Government empowers every state to make his own RERA and set its own rules and regulations as per their discretion. Whenever any builder wants to start new construction project for homes, flats and apartments then it is mandatory for him to register his project to the RERA and take permission for make any further moves in the project. Builder can only continue if the RERA allows the project. The person can also file criminal complaint and can also approach consumer redressal forums. The person feel offended can also go for arbitrational tribunal if the parties agree to it. But in most of the cases the aggrieved person in case of home buying moved towards the process of RERA initially.
In Simmi Sikka vs. Emaar MFG, it is ruled by the court that provision of the Act regarding registration had been violated. Simmi approached the concerned authority and stated that she had booked a shop and paid a specific amount with interest as for the payment. The builder and the complainant entered into the agreement on 9-05-2014 and duly signed the same. As per the agreement the work has to be completed within the period of 30 months from the date of the execution of agreement. but the same has not been done and she files a complaint against the builder contented that the promoter is not acting as per the terms and conditions of the agreements and the time period mentioned under the agreement is expired and there is no work of construction is going on for the past two years. The period of 30 months had expired too. On these statements the authority ruled that the above project was not received the completion certificate as the same is not registered under the RERA and the promoter was directed to register the project within the time period of three months and further stated that if the promoter does not comply he will be penalized as it is a legal obligation of the every promoter to get the project registered under RERA as per the provisions of the RERA Act, 2016.
As a smart home buyer it the duty of every home buyer to go for those projects who are registered under RERA or take advice from the experts. Most of the time it has been seen and observed that the builders makes fake promises at time of making agreement with their clients and lure the public at large who falls up for the trap and invest in the projects by taking loans from the financial institutions. There are certain situations where in reasonable context builder fails to handover the possession to the buyer such as approval delay, funding issues and so on. But usually, the delay is due to the developer’s negligence as they do not want to use their own money or from their own pocket so they wait for someone’s investment to use in the construction work.
The Apex court affirms the orders of consumer commission ordering the developer to refund the amount to the buyer in Kolkata West International City vs. Devsis Rudra, the date of handling over the possession of the home is December 2008 with grace period of six months. In 2011 buyer filed complaint before consumer forum for entitlement of the possession and refund of amount paid to developer. The commissions granted the award and the developer had even received the completion certificate under RERA. Hence the court stated that it was about seven years extended as per the date mentioned in the agreement and there should be a limited time period to be awaited so it is unfair for the buyer to not grant him the relief. Therefore the Supreme Court refuses to interfere with the order of refund by commission.
While entering into the agreement with a developer the buyer has to see the completion certificate of the project. There are found to be various other complexities that is to be seen which are amount, interest amount, time period, calculation of time period, evaluation, grace period, terms of the agreements and other relate particulars. The Supreme Court in M/S imperia Structure vs. Anil Patni and anothers held that the period of allotment starts from the date of the buyer agreement and not from the date of registration of the project. The buyer and builder agreement executed on 30-11-2013 and the project was registered under the Real estate regulatory authority on 17-11-2017. The subject matter is to be handed within 42 months. The buyer being aggrieved by the non-completion of the project within stipulated time period, he approached that National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission. The builder in the same approached the Supreme Court where he contended that the registration is valid till December 2020 and the project is thereon not delayed till the date. The court on the contention taken by the builder stated that merely because the registration under RERA is valid does not mean that the entitlement of the concerned allottees to maintain an action stands deferred. The Supreme Court rejected the contentions of the builder and held that period of the allotment has to be calculated or determined on the period mentioned in the agreement not on the registration.

5/5 (1 Review)