CCI Projects Private Limited Mumbai vs Rajesh Kumar Chaudhary And Anr

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

The Second Appeal was filed by the Promoter challenging the judgment of the Maharashtra Real Estate Appellate Tribunal (MahaRERA Appellate Tribunal) which had quashed the order of MahaRERA and directed the Promoter to pay interest for delayed possession of a flat in the project 'Wintergreen' developed by the Promoter. The allottees had booked an apartment with an agreed date of possession of February 2016, but possession was not given even by the date of filing of the complaint in May 2018. The Appellate Tribunal held that there was no authentic evidence of the allottees having accepted the revised date of possession or having waived their right to interest, and accordingly directed the Promoter to pay interest at SBI's highest Marginal Cost of Lending Rate plus 2% from 1st March 2016 till actual handing over of possession.

The substantial questions of law framed by the High Court were: (i) whether acceptance of delayed performance under Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 disentitles the promisee from claiming compensation for non-performance at the agreed time; (ii) whether Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 overrides Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872; and (iii) whether force majeure events listed in the contract could have been ignored in view of Section 32 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

The case raises important questions regarding the interplay between statutory rights of allottees under RERA and contractual defences available to promoters, including the effect of silence or non-objection by allottees to unilateral extensions of possession dates, and the applicability of force majeure clauses in real estate agreements.

Catchwords: Real estate · RERA · delayed possession · interest on delayed possession · force majeure · Section 18 RERA · Section 55 Indian Contract Act · Section 32 Indian Contract Act · promoter · allottee · waiver · acquiescence · MahaRERA · Appellate Tribunal · second appeal · substantial question of law