Explore a comprehensive legal analysis focusing on compensation entitlement and maintenance charges in a case revolving around delayed possession of a flat. The judgments delivered by the courts delve into crucial legal principles that shape the rights and obligations of parties in similar scenarios. Stay informed about the nuances of the case and the court’s meticulous examination of the issues at hand.
Facts
- Apartment Buyers’ Agreement specified the flat area to be 1760 square feet
- Leave granted on limited questions formulated by the Court during notice issuance
- Consideration amount for the flat was Rs.45,12,000/- to be paid as per installment payment plan
- Disputes arise from an Agreement between Utpal Trehan and DLF Home Developers for a flat in New Town Heights, Gurgaon
- Allottee claims the total sum demanded was around Rs.9 lakhs
Also Read: Ensuring Maintenance Rights: Court’s Legal Analysis
Issue
- Controversy revolves around the quantum of compensation for delay in possession of a flat and the appellant’s obligation to pay maintenance charges.
- Issue pertains to compensation entitlement and maintenance charges in relation to delayed possession of a flat.
Also Read: Analyzing Evidentiary Value in Criminal Conviction Case
Arguments
- The complaint raised the issue of charging maintenance without delivery of possession, which was considered unjustified.
- The legal principles discussed in the preceding paragraphs are crucial in resolving the dispute over maintenance charges.
- The question of law raised in the special leave petition (now appeal) was deemed broad enough to encompass the issue of charging maintenance without possession.
- In determining the parties’ rights based on a legal question arising from the pleadings, it is necessary to address that question.
Also Read: Legal Authority and Res Judicata in Representation Matter
Analysis
- The State Commission found that the allottee could not be deprived of the benefits outlined in the builder’s letter of 26 March 2009 due to failure to pay instalments within the due date.
- The National Commission partly allowed both appeals, directing the builder to offer possession of the apartment afresh within 6 weeks and execute the sale deed within one month thereafter.
- The builder was directed to pay compensation for delayed possession, interest on the sale price, and timely payment rebate.
- Both Commissions erred in directing the allottee to pay maintenance charges to the association when there was no claim made by the association.
- The two fora should not have directed the allottee to make payment of maintenance charges without proper claim or authority from the builder to represent the association.
- The State Commission’s view on payment of delayed compensation was supported as the right view.
- The builder’s request for payment of delayed payment compensation only up to the date of offer for possession was considered invalid.
- The terms of the Agreement were modified by the builder due to delays in regulatory clearance, providing benefits to flat buyers.
- The delivery and payment stipulations were modified due to delay in regulatory processes.
- The judgment in the case of Wing Commander Arifur Rahman Khan and Aleya Sultana and Others vs DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. does not apply in the present case.
- The Agreement involved in the previous case was found to be lopsided, giving unjustified advantage to the builder.
- Reliance has been placed on judgments of two coordinate Benches of this Court: DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. vs D.S. Dhanda and Ors. and DLF Home Developers Ltd. vs Capital Greens Flat Buyers Association & Ors.
- Directions assuming liability or obligation of the allottee can’t be given in the absence of the claimant
- Claimant must bring action or stake claim in the proceedings for declaratory relief
- Order to issue a fresh offer of possession upheld by the National and State Commissions
Decision
- The National Commission’s direction regarding payment of delayed compensation was modified.
- Delayed compensation is to be paid at the rate of Rs.10 per square feet per month from March 2011 until the fresh offer of possession is issued.
- Execution of Deed should be completed within the specified period.
- Allottee will receive delayed possession compensation after adjusting the already paid compensation.
- Direction on costs to be paid to the allottee remains unchanged at Rs.50,000.
- Time for issuing offer of possession extended by eight weeks.
- Focus was only on the specific questions for which leave was granted.
- Adjustment to be made for early payment rebate of Rs.95,136 as per National Commission’s direction.
- Allottee’s prayers before the State Commission included early possession and compensation for mental trauma.
- Notice limited to the issue of maintenance charges was issued in the allottee’s appeal.
Case Title: UTPAL TREHAN Vs. DLF HOME DEVELOPERS LTD. (2022 INSC 688)
Case Number: C.A. No.-004690-004690 / 2022
