Venkataraman Krishnamurthy and another Vs Lodha Crown Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court, in Venkataraman Krishnamurthy and another v. Lodha Crown Buildmart Pvt. Ltd., held that the terms of a written agreement governing possession and termination rights are binding on both parties and cannot be rewritten by consumer fora based on their own assessment of what constitutes a reasonable delay.
The appellants had entered into an Agreement to Sell dated 29.11.2013 for the purchase of a 4BHK apartment in a proposed residential project in Mumbai for a total consideration of ₹7,55,50,956/-. Under the agreement, possession of the apartment for fit outs was to be offered by 30.06.2016, subject to a grace period of one year extending the deadline to 30.06.2017. The appellants had paid ₹2,25,31,148/- and were not in default. The agreement further contemplated a separate stage of final possession linked to the issuance of an Occupation Certificate and availability of key common areas and amenities.
The agreement specifically provided that if possession for fit outs was not offered within the stipulated period, including the grace period, the purchaser had two options: either continue with the agreement by accepting a revised possession date communicated by the developer, or terminate the agreement by giving written notice within ninety days of expiry of the grace period. In the event of valid termination, the developer was required to refund the amount paid by the purchaser in twelve equal monthly instalments with simple interest at 12% per annum.
