DLF HOMES PANCHKULA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SHIV KUMAR versus SUSHILA DEVI AND ANR. ETC.

DLF HOMES PANCHKULA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SHIV KUMAR versus SUSHILA DEVI AND ANR. ETC.

The Supreme Court disposed the appeals on the parties' agreed understanding following this Court's earlier directions (Himanshu Arora), directing uniform modulation of interest at 9% per annum with specified rules for reckoning periods for refund and possession cases, directed transfer of amounts in Fixed Deposit Receipts and payment/recovery of amounts shown in the chart within six weeks, corrected certain computations (Colonel Kohli), and otherwise affirmed the National Commission's dismissal of the Developer's appeals where applicable.

Parties
Appellant/developer: DLF Homes Panchkula (P) Ltd. through its Authorised Signatory Mr. Shiv Kumar; Respondent/complainant: Sushila Devi
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment and Disposal by the Supreme Court
Outcome
All appeals disposed of in terms of the parties' agreed understanding and this Court's directions; SLP(C) Nos.931 and 939 of 2019 disposed as settled; SLP(C) No.968 of 2019 listed for consideration before an appropriate Bench; no costs.
Legal Topics
Deficiency in Service, Delayed Delivery of Possession, Refund, Compensation, Interest
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 Civil Procedure Deficiency in Service Delayed Delivery of Possession Refund Compensation Interest

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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DLF Homes Panchkula (P) Ltd. through its Authorised Signatory Mr. Shiv Kumar

Appellant/developer

Sushila Devi

Respondent/complainant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment and Disposal by the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Developer was deficient in service for delayed delivery of possession
  2. 2 Whether complainants were entitled to refund of amounts paid with interest or only compensation while keeping possession
  3. 3 Whether appeals before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission could be validly heard in the absence of a Judicial Member on the Bench

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court disposed the appeals on the parties' agreed understanding following this Court's earlier directions (Himanshu Arora), directing uniform modulation of interest at 9% per annum with specified rules for reckoning periods for refund and possession cases, directed transfer of amounts in Fixed Deposit Receipts and payment/recovery of amounts shown in the chart within six weeks, corrected certain computations (Colonel Kohli), and otherwise affirmed the National Commission's dismissal of the Developer's appeals where applicable.

Court Disposition

All appeals disposed of in terms of the parties' agreed understanding and this Court's directions; SLP(C) Nos.931 and 939 of 2019 disposed as settled; SLP(C) No.968 of 2019 listed for consideration before an appropriate Bench; no costs.

Orders

  • Amounts standing in Fixed Deposit Receipts against each complainant along with accrued interest to be made over to the complainant upon proper identification to the satisfaction of the State Commission within six weeks
  • Developer to make over to each complainant the amount shown as 'Amount Recoverable/Payable' (Column No.17) within six weeks