Page 21 - Banking Finance April 2025
P. 21

LEGAL UPDATE

         Privacy  and  had  challenged  the  layed possession, substandard con-  2009, but the flat was not ready. How-
         Aadhaar Act, said the amendment at-  struction,  or  non-compliance  with  ever, the builder made an illegal de-
         tempts to  "re-legislate" the struck-  NCDRC or Real Estate Regulatory Au-  mand for the balance amount, even
         down Section 57.                   thority (Rera) orders have attempted  though the flat was not ready for pos-
         "This is virtually an attempt to re-leg-  to seek protection under the IBC mora-  session, so Chourasiya refused to pay.
         islate the SC judgement which was  torium.                            The builder sent a legal notice dated
                                                                               April 8, 2010, through its lawyers, inti-
         struck down on the grounds that per-
         sonal data was susceptible to misuse if Flat sale to third party ille-  mating Chourasiya that the agreement
                                                                               was being terminated due to his fail-
         exposed widely and could  create  a  gal if agreement valid
         spectre of surveillance State," he said.                              ure to make the payment. The builder
                                            Subhash Ramjag Chourasiya booked a  then sold the flat to Subhash Tilakdhari
         However, the Ministry has clarified  flat with Sai Krupa Builders. The agree-  Pathak on April 12, 2011, by executing
         that with the security processes pro-  ment to sell was registered on August  another agreement, which was regis-
         posed in the amendment, no private  2, 2007. According to the agreement,  tered in January 2012.
         entity will be able to misuse Aadhaar  the total consideration payable was Rs
         data.                              7,50,000. The date of possession was  Chourasiya filed a complaint before the
                                                                               Than District Forum on April 21, 2011,
                                            left blank, but Chourasiya stated that
                                                                               unaware  that  the  flat  had  already
         Apex court protects con-           he was told the flat would be ready  been sold to a third party. He pointed
                                            within 18 months, with a further grace
         sumers from IBC misuse by                                             out that due to the delay in delivery,
                                            period of three months.
         realtors                           Chourasiya claimed he paid Rs 6 lakh  he had to hire accommodation on a
                                                                               Leave and Licence basis and claimed
         The recent Supreme Court order say-  through  cheques  and  Rs  45,000 in  reimbursement of the amount he had
         ing interim moratorium in the Insol-  cash. The builder admitted receiving  incurred for rental accommodation. He
         vency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) does  the cheque payments but denied re-  also sought a direction to the builder
         not shield a company or an individual  ceiving any cash payment. The balance  to either give him possession of the
         from paying regulatory dues has come  amount was payable at the time of  flat or provide permanent alternative
         as a blow to unscrupulous real estate  possession.                    accommodation. Additionally, he ap-
         developers, businesses, and personal
                                            Subhash Ramjag Chourasiya booked a  plied for an injunction restraining the
         guarantors using the Code to evade
                                            flat with Sai Krupa Builders. The agree-  builder from creating a third-party in-
         such payments, according to experts.
                                            ment to sell was registered on August  terest in the flat. This complaint was
         The top court's order was in connec-  2, 2007. According to the agreement,  withdrawn  as  it  was  beyond  the
         tion with the penalties and execution  the total consideration payable was Rs  Forum's pecuniary jurisdiction and was
         imposed on the proprietor of East and  7,50,000. The date of possession was  subsequently  filed  before  the
         West Builders, which is undergoing in-  left blank, but Chourasiya stated that  Maharashtra State Commission.
         solvency proceedings by the National  he was told the flat would be ready
         Consumer Disputes Redressal Commis-  within 18 months, with a further grace
         sion (NCDRC).                      period of three months.                          Join

         "The ruling sets a strong precedent,  Chourasiya claimed he paid Rs 6 lakh
         ensuring that  consumer  rights  and  through  cheques  and  Rs  45,000 in  Online Certificate
         regulatory penalties remain enforce-  cash. The builder admitted receiving      Course on
         able, even during financial distress,"  the cheque payments but denied re-
         said  Deepika  Kumari, partner, King  ceiving any cash payment. The balance
         Stubb & Kasiva, Advocates and Attor-  amount was payable at the time of Marine Insurance
         neys.                              possession.
                                                                                    For details please visit
         Legal experts said that many builders  The assured date of delivery, including  www.smartonlinecourse.co.in
         facing consumer complaints for de-  the grace period, expired in December

            BANKING FINANCE |                                                                APRIL | 2025 | 19
   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26