SC cautions against entertaining pleas by homebuyers in stalled projects

The Supreme Court said separate petitions by homebuyers could delay its ruling in a pending case and asked litigants to await the verdict or approach the respective High Courts.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday cautioned that entertaining separate petitions from homebuyers of stalled housing projects could delay its decision on a pending case involving alleged irregularities by real estate developers and financial institutions.

 

A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana said the court could not become a common forum for homebuyers from every troubled housing project, adding that similar grievances should be addressed by the respective High Courts after the apex court rules on the main case.

 

“We never thought that every day people would keep filing LAs, MAs and contempt petitions, and we would be stuck without deciding the main case. Better you wait,” CJI Kant told the petitioners' counsel.

 

 

The Bench was hearing transfer petitions concerning stalled housing projects. Counsel submitted that several projects had been abandoned and that High Courts had already delivered judgments in related disputes, prompting homebuyers to approach the Supreme Court.

 

However, the court said the main case was ready for final disposal and that its ruling would lay down principles for other courts dealing with similar disputes.

 

“We are not inclined to entertain these transfer petitions because the main case, the lead case, is ripe for final disposal. Whatever principles are laid down by this Court, the High Courts will decide the pending cases accordingly,” the CJI said.

 

The court also indicated that petitioners could withdraw their transfer petitions and approach the Supreme Court or the relevant High Court at an appropriate stage after the lead case was decided.

 

Amicus proceedings cannot cover every project

 

During the hearing, counsel referred to the work of an amicus curiae appointed by the court to examine complaints concerning stalled housing projects. Counsel also pointed to action taken by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

 

Justice Bagchi clarified that the proceedings before the amicus could not be expanded to cover every stalled housing project in the country.

 

“It does not mean that every housing project in India has to be taken up by the amicus. The amicus is examining projects concerning a group of developer companies of which we have taken cognisance. Others will have to wait until we deliver a verdict,” he said.

 

CJI Kant noted that the court was receiving several new petitions every day, with homebuyers increasingly approaching it over similar disputes.

 

“Every day we are seeing four or five people filing petitions. It has become a new channel now,” he observed.

 

Responding to the suggestion that the petitions be listed again on November 26, the Bench maintained that it was not inclined to entertain them at this stage.

 

The CJI warned that allowing more homebuyers from the same project to approach the court would lead to an endless stream of litigation without securing a final resolution. He said litigants would have to await the outcome of the lead case or pursue remedies before the respective High Courts.

 

The Bench reiterated that its eventual ruling would guide High Courts in deciding pending disputes involving similar legal issues.