ALSO READWant the money you invested in Jaypee back? Here's what home buyers must do Insolvency Code: Home buyers' plight and how realty firms should be treated Govt setting up 31-member committee to advise on RERA, protect home buyers Options for buyers when builder goes bankrupt Relief for homebuyers: Insolvency plan to state all stakeholders' treatment
Home buyers cannot be made to wait indefinitely for possession of flats booked by them, the apex consumer commission has said as it asked a private builder to refund the amount paid by its customers. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) noted that possession was not given even after five years and asked New Delhi-based Adel Landmarks Limited to refund over Rs 66 lakh to five customers who were allotted flats in their project in Gurgaon in 2012. "The firm has chosen not to come forward to tell this commission as to why it has failed to deliver possession to them, and by which date it expects to deliver the possession, the buyers, in my opinion, are entitled to refund of the amount paid by them to the opposite party (firm), along with appropriate compensation," the bench, headed by its presiding member Justice V K Jain, said. The commission also imposed a cost of Rs 25,000 on the builder which would be given to the five home buyers -- Chirag Grover, Kamalpreet Singh Sethi, Ramesh Kumar, Raj Kumar and Dharmesh Jain. "Even if I take a period of five years from the initial allotment for delivery of the possession, the fact remains that the firm has failed to complete the construction and offer possession of the flat... "The persons cannot be made to wait indefinitely for the possession of the flats allotted to them and they are entitled to seek refund of the amount paid by them, along with compensation," the judge said. According to the complaint filed by the home buyers, they were allotted flats in the Gurgaon project of the firm in 2012. However, the project was scrapped and the firm later allotted them flats in another project with an extended delivery date. The commission noted that the firm failed to even finish the alternative project within a reasonable time frame.