Important RERA judgement
Allotte can't be compelled to take possession without occupation certificate after expiry of stipulated period
In the case of Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan (Civil Appeal No. 12238 of 2018), it was established that if a builder fails to fulfill their contractual obligation of obtaining the occupancy certificate and providing possession of the flat to the purchaser within the specified timeframe in the agreement, the
In the case of Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan (Civil Appeal No. 12238 of 2018), it was established that if a builder fails to fulfill their contractual obligation of obtaining the occupancy certificate and providing possession of the flat to the purchaser within the specified timeframe in the agreement, the flat purchaser cannot be compelled to take possession. As a result, the flat purchaser is entitled to a full refund of the amount deposited, along with interest. This situation may also lead to real estate litigation, and a property lawyer can assist in navigating such issues, especially in the context of RERA case filing and addressing RERA complaints.
Manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait
1. 2019 - Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, II (2019) CPJ 29 SC, where the Hon’ble Apex Court observed: “.....It would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession. By 2016, nearly seven years
1. 2019 - Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, II (2019) CPJ 29 SC, where the Hon’ble Apex Court observed: “.....It would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession. By 2016, nearly seven years had elapsed from the date of the agreement. Even according to the developer, the occupancy certificate was received on 29 March 2016. This was nearly seven years after the extended date for the handing over of possession prescribed by the agreement. A buyer can be expected to wait for possession for a reasonable period. A period of seven years is beyond what is reasonable. Hence, it would have been manifestly unfair to non-suit the buyer merely on the basis of the first prayer in the reliefs sought before the SCDRC. There was, in any event, a prayer for refund, which could also relate to real estate litigation. This case highlights the importance of timely RERA case filing and addressing RERA complaints effectively.
Possession not delivered within the specified time, allottee is entitled to a refund
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank (2007) 6 SCC 71
The Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court held that when possession of the allotted plot, flat, or house is not delivered within the specified time, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with reasonable interest from the date of payment until the d
Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank (2007) 6 SCC 71
The Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court held that when possession of the allotted plot, flat, or house is not delivered within the specified time, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with reasonable interest from the date of payment until the date of refund. This ruling is particularly relevant for property lawyers dealing with real estate litigation, as it highlights the importance of obtaining an occupancy certificate in a timely manner. Additionally, it may serve as a precedent in RERA case filing and when addressing RERA complaints.
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
HP RERA has ruled that a builder cannot demand full payment from a homebuyer if the occupancy certificate for the project has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not completed within the agreed timeframe for delivery of possession. This decision is significant in the context of real estate litigation, as it highlights th
HP RERA has ruled that a builder cannot demand full payment from a homebuyer if the occupancy certificate for the project has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not completed within the agreed timeframe for delivery of possession. This decision is significant in the context of real estate litigation, as it highlights the importance of proper legal compliance. Homebuyers should consider consulting a property lawyer to understand their rights and options regarding RERA case filing or addressing RERA complaints.
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
This is the latest direction issued by RERA in UP/Gurugram, stating that developers cannot use 70% of the money collected from buyers to pay off bank loans; this amount must be dedicated solely to the completion of construction. Buyers should ensure that they obtain the occupancy certificate in a timely manner. For those facing issues, co
This is the latest direction issued by RERA in UP/Gurugram, stating that developers cannot use 70% of the money collected from buyers to pay off bank loans; this amount must be dedicated solely to the completion of construction. Buyers should ensure that they obtain the occupancy certificate in a timely manner. For those facing issues, consulting a property lawyer may be necessary, especially in cases involving real estate litigation or RERA case filing for RERA complaints.
RERA JUDGEMENTS LINKS
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
RERA Andaman Nicobar, RERA Bihar, RERA Chandigarh, RERA Delhi, RERA Dehradun, RERA Gurugram, RERA Gujarat, RERA Goa, RERA Himachal, RERA Jaipur, RERA Karnataka, RERA Maharashtra, and RERA Madhya Pradesh are all governed by the framework that ensures transparency in real estate transactions. For those navigating real estate litigation or s
RERA Andaman Nicobar, RERA Bihar, RERA Chandigarh, RERA Delhi, RERA Dehradun, RERA Gurugram, RERA Gujarat, RERA Goa, RERA Himachal, RERA Jaipur, RERA Karnataka, RERA Maharashtra, and RERA Madhya Pradesh are all governed by the framework that ensures transparency in real estate transactions. For those navigating real estate litigation or seeking an occupancy certificate, understanding RERA regulations is crucial. Additionally, RERA Panchkula, RERA Punjab, RERA Tamil Nadu, RERA Telangana, and RERA UP provide avenues for RERA case filing and address RERA complaints effectively, ensuring that property lawyers can assist clients in resolving issues related to property transactions.
RERA judgement at glance
Builder cannot demand full payment if the Project's Occupancy Certificate is not obtained
Allotte can't be compelled to take possession without occupation certificate after expiry of stipulated period
HP RERA has ruled that a builder cannot demand full payment from a homebuyer if the Project's occupancy certificate has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not completed within the agreed time for delivery of possession. Homebuyers facing such issues may consider consulting a property lawyer to explore options for RERA case filing or to address any RERA complaints that may arise during real estate litigation.
Allotte can't be compelled to take possession without occupation certificate after expiry of stipulated period
Allotte can't be compelled to take possession without occupation certificate after expiry of stipulated period
In the case of Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan (Civil Appeal No. 12238 OF 2018), it was established that if a builder fails to fulfill his contractual obligation of obtaining the occupancy certificate and offering possession of the flat to the purchaser within the time stipulated in the Agreement, the flat purchaser cannot be compelled to take possession. Furthermore, the flat purchaser is entitled to a refund of the entire amount deposited, along with interest. This situation highlights the importance of engaging a property lawyer in real estate litigation, especially in cases involving RERA case filing and RERA complaints.
Possession not delivered within the specified time, allottee is entitled to a refund
In the case of Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank (2007) 6 SCC 71, the Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court held that if possession of the allotted plot, flat, or house is not delivered within the specified timeframe, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with reasonable interest from the date of payment until the date of refund. This ruling underscores the importance of obtaining an occupancy certificate in real estate transactions. Individuals facing issues related to property delivery may consider consulting a property lawyer to assist with real estate litigation or RERA case filing, especially if RERA complaints arise.
Manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait
1. In 2019, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, II (2019) CPJ 29 SC, observed the following: “.....It would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession. By 2016, nearly seven years had elapsed from the date of the agreement. Even according to the developer, the occupancy certificate was received on 29 March 2016. This was nearly seven years after the extended date for handing over possession prescribed by the agreement. A buyer can be expected to wait for possession for a reasonable period. A period of seven years is beyond what is reasonable. Hence, it would have been manifestly unfair to non-suit the buyer merely on the basis of the first prayer in the reliefs sought before the SCDRC. There was, in any event, a prayer for refund, which could be relevant in real estate litigation. For buyers experiencing similar issues, consulting a property lawyer may be beneficial, especially when considering RERA case filing or addressing RERA complaints.
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
This is the latest direction issued by RERA regarding the use of funds in Gurugram. Developers are now prohibited from using 70% of the money collected from buyers to repay bank loans; instead, this amount must be allocated solely for the completion of construction. This change is crucial for ensuring that buyers receive their occupancy certificate without delays, and it's advisable for those affected to consult a property lawyer for assistance with RERA case filing or any potential RERA complaints related to real estate litigation.
RERA JUDGEMENTS LINKS
Builders can't use 70% of buyers fund to repay bank loan
RERA Andaman Nicobar plays a crucial role in ensuring compliance with regulations related to real estate transactions, including the issuance of an occupancy certificate. RERA Bihar is also pivotal for homeowners seeking clarity in property matters and provides avenues for RERA case filing. In Chandigarh, RERA facilitates the resolution of RERA complaints, ensuring that property buyers are protected. RERA Delhi oversees real estate transactions, while RERA Dehradun ensures that properties adhere to legal standards, often requiring the assistance of a property lawyer. RERA Gurugram is essential for managing real estate litigation, helping clients navigate disputes effectively. Similarly, RERA Gujarat and RERA Goa provide frameworks for addressing issues related to occupancy certificates and property transactions. RERA Himachal, RERA Jaipur, and RERA Karnataka work towards safeguarding buyer interests, while RERA Maharashtra and RERA Madhya Pradesh offer robust mechanisms for RERA case filing. In Panchkula, RERA Punjab ensures that consumer rights are upheld, as does RERA Tamil Nadu and RERA Telangana. Lastly, RERA UP helps in resolving real estate disputes, making it easier for buyers to manage their property concerns.
REAR Judgements Overview
As Reported in Public domain
NBW issued against 86 builders by RERA Court Gurugram. Jaypee Kalypso Court: RERA assisted the buyers in getting a disputed realty project completed in Noida within two years. Homebuyers can seek protection under RERA against banks for non-payment of loans by builders under the agreement. The RERA prevails over the SARFAESI Act, according to the Supreme Court. Builders are directed to pay homebuyers assured returns. The Haryana Real Estate Regulator Authority (H-RERA) in Gurugram holds that developers cannot deny assured returns to investors or walk away from contractual obligations, citing the new RERA law implemented in 2016. In a recent RERA case filing, the court directed a developer to pay INR 2 crore for failing to develop flats on time. Homebuyers are entitled to 'just and reasonable' compensation for delays in possession, as affirmed by the Supreme Court. The delayed handing over of possession is considered a 'deficiency'; flat buyers are entitled to compensation as per the ruling in Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Kan and Aleya Sultana v. DLF Southern Homes Pvt Ltd, Civil Appeal No. 6239 of 2019, decided on 24.08.2020. The NCDRC orders developers in Gurgaon real estate projects to refund Rs 12 crore to homebuyers and disposes of 25 cases. UP RERA has imposed a ₹2.5 crore penalty on 11 developers for non-compliance, emphasizing that developers should not charge buyers until homes are completed and occupancy certificates are issued. When flats are not ready on time, RERA Gurugram asks the developer to pay Rs 2 crore. UP RERA also re-imposes a penalty on Supertech for the delay in the delivery of 7000 flats. In Gurugram, two builders have been instructed to fully refund five flat buyers in Sector-37C, promoted by Ramprastha Promoters.
LATEST RERA NEWS
judgements on possession
Complainants cannot be made to wait indefinitely as the possession
HP RERA has ruled that a builder cannot demand full payment from a homebuyer if the Project's occupancy certificate has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not completed within the agreed time for delivery of possession. Homebuyers facing such issues may consider consulting a property lawyer to explore options for RERA case filing or to address any RERA complaints that may arise during real estate litigation.
Failure to obtain the completion certificate in time Purchaser can’t be compelled to take possessio
In the case of Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan (Civil Appeal No. 12238 OF 2018), it was established that if a builder fails to fulfill his contractual obligation of obtaining the occupancy certificate and offering possession of the flat to the purchaser within the time stipulated in the Agreement, the flat purchaser cannot be compelled to take possession. Furthermore, the flat purchaser is entitled to a refund of the entire amount deposited, along with interest. This situation highlights the importance of engaging a property lawyer in real estate litigation, especially in cases involving RERA case filing and RERA complaints.
Supreme court of India M/S Treaty Construction vs M/S Ruby Tower Co Op Hsg. Society ... On 19 July,
In the case of Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank (2007) 6 SCC 71, the Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court held that if possession of the allotted plot, flat, or house is not delivered within the specified timeframe, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with reasonable interest from the date of payment until the date of refund. This ruling underscores the importance of obtaining an occupancy certificate in real estate transactions. Individuals facing issues related to property delivery may consider consulting a property lawyer to assist with real estate litigation or RERA case filing, especially if RERA complaints arise.
One sided agreement
1. In 2019, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in the case of Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, II (2019) CPJ 29 SC, observed the following: “.....It would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession. By 2016, nearly seven years had elapsed from the date of the agreement. Even according to the developer, the occupancy certificate was received on 29 March 2016. This was nearly seven years after the extended date for handing over possession prescribed by the agreement. A buyer can be expected to wait for possession for a reasonable period. A period of seven years is beyond what is reasonable. Hence, it would have been manifestly unfair to non-suit the buyer merely on the basis of the first prayer in the reliefs sought before the SCDRC. There was, in any event, a prayer for refund, which could be relevant in real estate litigation. For buyers experiencing similar issues, consulting a property lawyer may be beneficial, especially when considering RERA case filing or addressing RERA complaints.
Concurrent Jurisdiction of Consumer court
This is the latest direction issued by RERA regarding the use of funds in Gurugram. Developers are now prohibited from using 70% of the money collected from buyers to repay bank loans; instead, this amount must be allocated solely for the completion of construction. This change is crucial for ensuring that buyers receive their occupancy certificate without delays, and it's advisable for those affected to consult a property lawyer for assistance with RERA case filing or any potential RERA complaints related to real estate litigation.
Builder to pay Compensation and interest to buyers for delay in possession
RERA Andaman Nicobar plays a crucial role in ensuring compliance with regulations related to real estate transactions, including the issuance of an occupancy certificate. RERA Bihar is also pivotal for homeowners seeking clarity in property matters and provides avenues for RERA case filing. In Chandigarh, RERA facilitates the resolution of RERA complaints, ensuring that property buyers are protected. RERA Delhi oversees real estate transactions, while RERA Dehradun ensures that properties adhere to legal standards, often requiring the assistance of a property lawyer. RERA Gurugram is essential for managing real estate litigation, helping clients navigate disputes effectively. Similarly, RERA Gujarat and RERA Goa provide frameworks for addressing issues related to occupancy certificates and property transactions. RERA Himachal, RERA Jaipur, and RERA Karnataka work towards safeguarding buyer interests, while RERA Maharashtra and RERA Madhya Pradesh offer robust mechanisms for RERA case filing. In Panchkula, RERA Punjab ensures that consumer rights are upheld, as does RERA Tamil Nadu and RERA Telangana. Lastly, RERA UP helps in resolving real estate disputes, making it easier for buyers to manage their property concerns.
judgements on possession
Complainants cannot be made to wait indefinitely as the possession
In the case of Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. vs Govindan Raghavan (Civil Appeal No. 12238 of 2018), it was established that if a builder fails to fulfill their contractual obligation of obtaining the occupancy certificate and providing possession of the flat to the purchaser within the specified timeframe in the agreement, the flat purchaser cannot be compelled to take possession. As a result, the flat purchaser is entitled to a full refund of the amount deposited, along with interest. This situation may also lead to real estate litigation, and a property lawyer can assist in navigating such issues, especially in the context of RERA case filing and addressing RERA complaints.
Failure to obtain the completion certificate in time Purchaser can’t be compelled to take possessio
1. 2019 - Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Kolkata West International City Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, II (2019) CPJ 29 SC, where the Hon’ble Apex Court observed: “.....It would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession. By 2016, nearly seven years had elapsed from the date of the agreement. Even according to the developer, the occupancy certificate was received on 29 March 2016. This was nearly seven years after the extended date for the handing over of possession prescribed by the agreement. A buyer can be expected to wait for possession for a reasonable period. A period of seven years is beyond what is reasonable. Hence, it would have been manifestly unfair to non-suit the buyer merely on the basis of the first prayer in the reliefs sought before the SCDRC. There was, in any event, a prayer for refund, which could also relate to real estate litigation. This case highlights the importance of timely RERA case filing and addressing RERA complaints effectively.
Supreme court of India M/S Treaty Construction vs M/S Ruby Tower Co Op Hsg. Society ... On 19 July,
Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank (2007) 6 SCC 71
The Coordinate Bench of the Supreme Court held that when possession of the allotted plot, flat, or house is not delivered within the specified time, the allottee is entitled to a refund of the amount paid, along with reasonable interest from the date of payment until the date of refund. This ruling is particularly relevant for property lawyers dealing with real estate litigation, as it highlights the importance of obtaining an occupancy certificate in a timely manner. Additionally, it may serve as a precedent in RERA case filing and when addressing RERA complaints.
One sided agreement
HP RERA has ruled that a builder cannot demand full payment from a homebuyer if the occupancy certificate for the project has not been obtained and the construction of the flat is not completed within the agreed timeframe for delivery of possession. This decision is significant in the context of real estate litigation, as it highlights the importance of proper legal compliance. Homebuyers should consider consulting a property lawyer to understand their rights and options regarding RERA case filing or addressing RERA complaints.
Concurrent Jurisdiction of Consumer court
This is the latest direction issued by RERA in UP/Gurugram, stating that developers cannot use 70% of the money collected from buyers to pay off bank loans; this amount must be dedicated solely to the completion of construction. Buyers should ensure that they obtain the occupancy certificate in a timely manner. For those facing issues, consulting a property lawyer may be necessary, especially in cases involving real estate litigation or RERA case filing for RERA complaints.
Builder to pay Compensation and interest to buyers for delay in possession
RERA Andaman Nicobar, RERA Bihar, RERA Chandigarh, RERA Delhi, RERA Dehradun, RERA Gurugram, RERA Gujarat, RERA Goa, RERA Himachal, RERA Jaipur, RERA Karnataka, RERA Maharashtra, and RERA Madhya Pradesh are all governed by the framework that ensures transparency in real estate transactions. For those navigating real estate litigation or seeking an occupancy certificate, understanding RERA regulations is crucial. Additionally, RERA Panchkula, RERA Punjab, RERA Tamil Nadu, RERA Telangana, and RERA UP provide avenues for RERA case filing and address RERA complaints effectively, ensuring that property lawyers can assist clients in resolving issues related to property transactions.