Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a consumer complaint regarding the delay in handing over possession of an apartment. The appellant, M/s Lanco Hills Technology Park Pvt Ltd, entered into an agreement with the respondents on 21 March 2011 for the sale of an apartment in Hyderabad, with a total consideration of Rs 1,55,50,826, which later included an additional amount for parking. The agreement stipulated that possession would be handed over by 28 March 2011, with a grace period of three months. However, a restraining order from the State Waqf Tribunal delayed the possession until it was vacated by the Supreme Court on 8 May 2012. The appellant communicated that the apartment would be ready for occupation by 3 November 2012, but the respondents claimed that possession was not handed over until 28 August 2014. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) ruled in favor of the respondents, ordering compensation for the delay. The appellant contended that possession was handed over as per the sale deed executed on 11 February 2013. The court found that despite the sale deed, the actual possession was only given in August 2014, thus the appellant was liable for compensation for the delay. The court scaled down the interest rate and directed a lump sum compensation of Rs 10 lakhs for the delay beyond the contractual provisions. The appeal was partly allowed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the compensation within one month. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Consumer Protection - Compensation for Delay - Liability for Delay in Possession - Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - The court held that the appellant was liable to pay compensation for the delay in possession as the possession was only handed over on 28 August 2014, despite the sale deed stating otherwise. The court directed compensation for the period of delay beyond the grace period stipulated in the agreement. (Paras 12-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant was liable to pay compensation for the delay in handing over possession of the apartment despite the execution of the sale deed.
Final Decision
The appeal was partly allowed, directing the appellant to pay compensation for the delay in possession, calculated at Rs 10 lakhs for the period beyond the contractual terms.
Law Points
- Consumer protection
- compensation for delay
- force majeure
- contractual obligations
- possession transfer
