SC: CIRP Need Not Be Set Aside Solely for Fraudulent Filing of Section 9 Plea  ||  Supreme Court: Compromise Decree Passed Without Impleading Necessary Party is Void  ||  SC: Cheque Dishonour Notice Valid if Sent to Drawer’s Address and Received by Family  ||  J&K&L HC: Minority During Attestation Cannot Justify Decades-Long Delay in Challenging Mutation  ||  Bombay HC: WhatsApp Circulation of Objectionable Photos Can Attract SC/ST Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Cardiac Arrest From Stress of Long-Distance Driving is Compensable  ||  Delhi HC: Accused Cannot Delay Trial and Then Rely on Delay to Seek Bail  ||  Calcutta HC: Insurer Must Compensate Child’s Accidental Death Despite Driver’s Fake Licence  ||  Bombay HC Tells X to Take Down Defamatory Post Targeting Serum Institute, CEO Adar Poonawalla  ||  Delhi High Court Restores Arbitral Award in DMRC’s Favour Passed by Employee-Arbitrator    

Sanjay Arora v. Unitech Ltd. & Ors. - (National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission) (11 May 2016)

How long can builders keep paying compensation

Consumer

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission passed yet another order against a property developer for its prolonged failure to deliver possession of a flat.

In the instant case, the property developer had defaulted on delivering possession of the flat by over 10 years. Instead, when the complainant stopped payment of instalments, his bank initiated debt recovery proceedings against him.

The Commission awarded the complainant Rs. 60 lakhs, consideration for the flat, and interest at 18 per cent per annum from the date of deposit. Sums were also awarded for mental and physical harassment and towards litigation costs.

The NCDRC hears and disposes several such property disputes on an almost daily basis. Even in the instant case, it noted that a joint claim by 144 complainants was pending against Unitech Ltd. before just this one forum.

Tags : PROPERTY DEVELOPER   POSSESSION   DELAY   COMPENSATION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved