Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govindan Raghavan (2019) 5 SCC 725
Facts:
Builder delayed possession for years and imposed arbitrary extra charges.
Principle:
A builder cannot take advantage of its own wrong. Delay + unfair charges = deficiency in service.
Significance:
Consumer can demand refund + interest, even if buyer agreement is one-sided.
2️. Fortune Infrastructure v. Trevor D’Lima (2018) 5 SCC 442
Facts:
Flat delayed for more than 7 years.
Principle:
If the project is delayed indefinitely, the buyer can seek full refund, not forced to wait.
Significance:
Court held that “waiting endlessly is unfair”. Buyer has the right to exit the project.
3️. Kolkata West International City Pvt Ltd v. Devasis Rudra (2019) 4 SCC 303
Facts:
Builder delayed possession for 6+ years.
Principle:
A delay beyond “reasonable time” entitles the buyer to full refund with interest.
Significance:
Even if agreement has no clear possession date, unreasonable delay is enough for refund.
4️. Experion Developers Pvt Ltd v. Sushma Ashok Shiroor (2022) 1 SCC 319
Facts:
Builder charged excess/additional amounts beyond agreement.
Principle:
Builder cannot impose any extra charge unless authorized in the buyer agreement.
Significance:
Overpricing and extra charges = unfair trade practice.
5️. Wing Commander Arifur Rahman Khan v. DLF Southern Homes (2020) 16 SCC 512
Facts:
Multiple buyers challenged delay and poor construction quality.
Principle:
Buyers are consumers. Builder must pay compensation + interest for delay.
Significance:
Class-action style case — strong precedent for group complaints.
6️. IREO Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Abhishek Khanna (2021) 3 SCC 241
Facts:
Builder offered possession but occupation certificate was not obtained.
Principle:
Offering “symbolic possession” without OC is illegal.
Significance:
Buyer can demand refund + interest.
7️. NBCC (India) Ltd. v. Shri Ram Trivedi (2021) 5 SCC 273
Facts:
Builder delayed and demanded more money for escalation in cost.
Principle:
No increase in price unless specifically provided in the agreement.
Significance:
Strongest judgment against price escalation.
8️. Parsvnath Developers Ltd. v. Union of India (2019 NCDRC)
Facts:
Delay + forced extra charges.
Principle:
Builder must pay delay compensation at market rates.
Significance:
NCDRC imposed heavy penalties on the builder.
9️. DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt Ltd v. D.S. Dhanda (2019) 11 SCC 379
Facts:
Extra and unfair charges imposed.
Principle:
Consumer courts can strike down arbitrary costs.
Significance:
Overpricing = unfair trade practice.
10. Emaar MGF Land Ltd. v. Amit Puri (2015) 4 CPJ 036
Facts:
Delay beyond agreed date.
Principle:
Reasonable compensation must be paid for every month of delay.
Significance:
Used widely for compensation calculation.
Add a Comment