Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Second Appeal filed by CCI Projects Private Limited (the promoter) against the judgment of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal dated 10th March 2021, which had quashed the MahaRERA order dated 17th September 2018 and directed the promoter to pay interest for delayed possession to the allottees (Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary and others). The allottees had booked apartments in a project called 'Rivali Park' and the possession was delayed beyond the agreed date. The promoter argued that the allottees had accepted possession without protest and thus waived their right to claim interest under Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The promoter also raised force majeure as a defense. The court framed three substantial questions of law: (i) whether acceptance of delayed performance disentitles the promisee from claiming compensation under Section 55 of the Contract Act; (ii) whether Section 18 of RERA overrides Section 55 of the Contract Act; and (iii) whether force majeure events listed in the contract could be ignored under Section 32 of the Contract Act. The court held that Section 18 of RERA is a special provision that overrides the general provisions of the Contract Act, and the right to interest under RERA is not subject to waiver by acceptance of possession. The court also held that the promoter failed to prove force majeure as the cause of delay. The appeal was dismissed, and the allottees were entitled to interest for the period of delay.
Headnote
A) Real Estate Law - Delayed Possession - Interest under Section 18 of RERA - Overriding Effect - The court held that Section 18 of RERA is a substantive provision that overrides Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and acceptance of delayed possession does not disentitle the allottee from claiming interest for the period of delay. (Paras 1-32) B) Contract Law - Waiver of Right - Acceptance of Delayed Performance - The court held that mere acceptance of possession after the stipulated date does not constitute waiver of the right to claim compensation for delay under Section 55 of the Contract Act, and in any case, Section 18 of RERA provides an independent remedy. (Paras 1-32) C) Real Estate Law - Force Majeure - Burden of Proof - The court held that force majeure events must be specifically pleaded and proved by the promoter; general allegations are insufficient. The promoter failed to establish that the delay was caused solely by force majeure events listed in the agreement. (Paras 1-32)
Issue of Consideration
Whether acceptance of delayed possession disentitles allottees from claiming interest under Section 18 of RERA; whether Section 18 of RERA overrides Section 55 of Contract Act; whether force majeure events listed in the contract can be ignored under Section 32 of Contract Act.
Final Decision
The Second Appeal is dismissed. The judgment of the Appellate Tribunal dated 10th March 2021 is upheld. The promoter is directed to pay interest for delayed possession as per Section 18 of RERA.
Law Points
- Section 18 of RERA overrides Section 55 of Contract Act
- acceptance of delayed possession does not waive right to compensation
- force majeure events must be specifically pleaded and proved
- Section 32 of Contract Act does not apply to RERA claims
