AKSHAY & ANR. versus ADITYA & ORS.

AKSHAY & ANR. versus ADITYA & ORS.

Because an irrevocable power of attorney dated 6-7-2013 and a Joint Venture Agreement of the same date were operative when Respondent No.2 entered into sale agreements with the complainants, and the appellants' revocation letter dated 12-8-2014 limited liability only 'henceforth', the appellants remained bound by acts of Respondent No.2 until lawful termination of the JVA/IPA; appellants took no action to terminate the JVA and therefore could not escape joint and several liability; the appeals were dismissed.

Parties
Appellants/landowners: Akshay & Anr.; Respondents/complainants: Aditya & Ors.; Respondent No.2/builder: Glandstone Mahaveer Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
29 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment Appeals Dismissed by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Deficiency in Service, Joint Venture Agreement, Irrevocable Power of Attorney, Joint and Several Liability, Revocation of Power of Attorney
Consumer Protection Contract Property Law Deficiency in Service Joint Venture Agreement Irrevocable Power of Attorney Joint and Several Liability Revocation of Power of Attorney

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Akshay & Anr.

Appellants/landowners

Aditya & Ors.

Respondents/complainants

Glandstone Mahaveer Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent No.2/builder

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment Appeals Dismissed by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants were bound by the acts of Respondent No.2 carried out pursuant to the irrevocable Power of Attorney until it was terminated
  2. 2 Whether appellants and Respondent No.2 were jointly and severally liable for deficiency in service under the agreements with the complainants

Ratio Decidendi

Because an irrevocable power of attorney dated 6-7-2013 and a Joint Venture Agreement of the same date were operative when Respondent No.2 entered into sale agreements with the complainants, and the appellants' revocation letter dated 12-8-2014 limited liability only 'henceforth', the appellants remained bound by acts of Respondent No.2 until lawful termination of the JVA/IPA; appellants took no action to terminate the JVA and therefore could not escape joint and several liability; the appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed and the impugned orders of the NCDRC and the State Commission upheld.
  • State Commission order (as set out in the judgment) directing OP Nos.1,2 & 3 to provide possession of the dwelling units agreed in Agreement to Sell within six months from receipt of copy of the order; complainants to pay entire consideration as per stages and final amount at time of sale deed and possession; OPs to...