carpet area
Share this

In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court underscored a pivotal principle – contractual terms cannot supersede the mandates of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA Act). The court emphasized that promoters cannot evade their responsibilities and liabilities as outlined in the act, regardless of the terms specified in contractual agreements.

The case in question involved a public institution governed by U.P Avas Evam Vikas Adhiniyam, 1973. The institution faced a complaint regarding the delayed possession of a flat. The appellant contended that legislative changes beyond its control caused the delays, justifying the postponed possession. However, the adjudicating authority sided with the complainant, instructing the appellant to compensate for the delay by paying interest.

Despite subsequent appeals, the Appellate Tribunal upheld the decision, prompting the appellant to challenge the ruling in the Allahabad High Court. After a thorough examination of the evidence, the court affirmed the tribunal’s decision, reiterating that contractual terms could not take precedence over the provisions of the RERA Act.

The court referred to the precedent set by the case of M/s Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. It underscored that even after executing the conveyance deed and taking possession of the unit, a homebuyer retains the right to claim compensation for possession delays.

In essence, the Allahabad High Court’s ruling serves as a clear declaration that the stipulations of the RERA Act hold primacy over any terms outlined in contractual agreements. Promoters are bound to fulfill their obligations and liabilities delineated in the act, and homebuyers retain the entitlement to seek compensation for possession delays in accordance with the act.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *