Case: Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni, (2020) 10 SCC 783
Supreme Court of India | 2 November 2020
A delayed housing project can leave buyers paying instalments and loan interest while possession remains uncertain. One question repeatedly raised in such disputes is whether the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) requires a homebuyer to pursue only the remedies available under that legislation.
The Supreme Court addressed that issue in Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni. Its answer was significant for buyers who had already invoked consumer law.
The dispute
The case concerned purchasers of apartments in a residential project in Gurugram. Completion had been delayed, and the buyers approached the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission seeking relief.
The Commission allowed their complaints. The developer challenged those decisions, contending, among other things, that the introduction of RERA altered the jurisdiction of consumer forums in relation to registered real estate projects.
Does RERA close the consumer forum’s door?
The Supreme Court rejected that contention. It examined the provisions of RERA, including Sections 18, 79 and 88, and held that the statutory remedies were not intended to extinguish the additional remedy available under consumer protection law.
The restriction on civil-court jurisdiction under Section 79 did not bar consumer forums from entertaining eligible complaints. The Court also noted that RERA itself preserved the availability of other remedies.
The developer’s appeals were dismissed.
What this means for a homebuyer
A buyer facing delayed possession may need to compare the remedies, procedure and jurisdiction of RERA with those under consumer protection legislation. Eligibility as a ‘consumer’, the relief actually sought and the relevant statutory requirements still have to be examined.
The judgment should not be read as permission to obtain duplicate compensation for the same injury. It confirms the availability of alternative statutory avenues; it does not dispense with ordinary requirements of maintainability or proof.
Why the ruling remains relevant
Although the dispute arose under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, the principle that a special real-estate remedy does not by itself displace consumer protection remains important in the later consumer-law framework.
For both purchasers and developers, Imperia Structures makes one point clear: the creation of RERA did not make every consumer complaint concerning a housing project legally unavailable.
Judgment: Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni, (2020) 10 SCC 783.
Related practice information: consumer and real estate remedies in Delhi.