Consumer Court Orders Rs 30 Lakh Refund for Homebuyer After Delayed Possession of Apartment

Owning a home is a dream cherished by many. However, for some, this dream turns into a nightmare when they fail to get possession of their property despite making the necessary payments. This was the case for K Suman, a resident of Nehru, who had booked an apartment but was left waiting indefinitely.

The Dispute

K Suman, like many others, aspired to own a flat and made a significant payment of Rs 20 lakh in 2020 to an apartment owner named Jogindra Sai in Jeypore, located in the Koraput district. The construction of the building had begun in 2017, and Suman was promised possession of the unit by December 2022. However, as the deadline came and went, the apartment was still not ready.

Despite the delays, Suman was repeatedly assured that the unit would be handed over soon. The apartment owner cited the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic as the primary reason for the delays. But after waiting for over two years and with no clear resolution in sight, Suman decided to take legal action.

The Legal Battle

Frustrated and seeking justice, Suman moved the consumer court in 2023. The court heard the case and concluded that the apartment owner had indeed failed to meet the agreed-upon deadlines and had not delivered the unit as promised.

In its ruling, the consumer court directed Jogindra Sai to refund Rs 20 lakh to Suman with an interest rate of 6 percent. Additionally, the court awarded Suman Rs 5 lakh as compensation for the mental distress and inconvenience caused by the delay. Suman was also awarded Rs 1 lakh to cover rent and other expenses incurred due to the non-delivery of the apartment.

Consequences for Non-Compliance

The court also set a strict deadline for the payment. Jogindra Sai was ordered to make the payment within 30 days of the court’s judgment. Should he fail to comply, the court ruled that the amount would accumulate interest at a rate of 12 percent until the payment was made.

The Aftermath

As of now, there has been no response from Jogindra Sai regarding the court’s order or the allegations made by Suman. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of timely possession in real estate deals and the recourse available to consumers when their rights are violated.

In a world where owning a home is a significant milestone, it is essential for builders and developers to honor their commitments. For those who find themselves in situations similar to Suman’s, this case highlights the importance of knowing one’s rights and taking legal action when necessary.