In a significant ruling aimed at protecting homebuyers from unfair trade practices, the Supreme Court has directed M/s Business Park Town Planners Ltd. to refund over Rs. 43 lakh to a consumer with 18% annual interest, holding that the builder could not escape liability after years of delay in handing over possession.
The bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Augustine George Masih delivered the judgment while allowing an appeal filed by Rajnish Sharma, who had booked a residential plot in 2006 but never received timely possession despite paying the full amount.
In March 2006, Sharma booked a plot in the builder’s “Park Land” project for ₹36.03 lakh and paid over ₹43.13 lakh in installments over the years. The builder failed to deliver possession within the agreed 24 months and, in 2011, offered an alternative plot citing “changes in the layout plan”. Even then, possession was not handed over until 2018, more than a decade later, and only on the condition that Sharma pay an additional ₹7.60 lakh. Frustrated, Sharma terminated the agreement in 2017, sought a refund with interest, and later approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).
In January 2023, the NCDRC ordered the builder to refund the principal with 9% interest. However, Sharma challenged this, arguing that the builder had unfairly charged him 18% interest for delayed payments, while offering only 9% for its own defaults.
The apex court criticized the builder’s conduct as “blemished throughout” and highlighted that the builder had no valid reason to delay possession for over a decade. Clause 7 of the agreement (citing changes in layout plan) was wrongly invoked without proof of government-mandated changes. While consumers must prove actual loss for compensation, in this case, equity and fairness demanded parity, as the builder had imposed steep penalties on the buyer but sought to pay back at a meagre rate.
The Supreme Court substituted the NCDRC’s 9% interest order with 18% simple interest per annum—the same rate the builder had charged Sharma for payment delays.
“The respondent cannot be permitted to escape with a nominal liability for its default. Equity demands that the builder face the same rigours it imposed on the buyer,” the bench ruled.
The Court directed the refund to be completed within two months.
Case Details
Case Title: Rajnesh Sharma Versus M/S. Business Park Town Planners Ltd.
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. 3988 Of 2023
Date: 24/09/2025
Read More: ED Attaches Rs. 155 Crore Worth of Properties in ₹1600 Crore LFS Broking Fraud Case
