Supreme Court Rules: Builders Must Pay Same Interest for Delayed Possession
The Supreme Court has ruled that real estate developers must pay the same 18% interest for delayed possession as they charge buyers for late payments, marking a significant victory for homebuyers.
Supreme CourtReal EstateHomebuyersInterest RatesDelayed PossessionReal Estate NewsSep 26, 2025
It should be noted that real estate developers typically impose an 18% interest on buyers for delayed payments. The apex court observed that “…it cannot be said that this Court has always rejected the claim of parity. Suffice it to say, there is no principle of law that interest in default charged by the builder can never be granted to the buyer.”
The Supreme Court noted that the amount of interest should be reasonable, and what is reasonable varies from case to case. The same is to be granted considering the facts and circumstances of each case. The series of judgments cited by the respondent to buttress its argument that the court has consistently granted interest at 9% per annum will make no difference to the decision in this case, as all the said cases were decided in light of the peculiar facts of each case.
A bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and AG Masih disagreed with the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's (NCDRC) award of 9% interest, holding it inadequate. Instead, they directed that interest be paid at 18% per annum, the same rate the builder had charged the buyer for delayed payments. “In view of the conduct of the respondent, it cannot be permitted to escape with a nominal liability for its default, while it charged interest @ 18% on default committed by the appellant. Equity and fairness demand that the respondent be put to the same rigours for charging 18% interest and face consequences similar to those imposed on the appellant for default committed by him. If we hold otherwise, we will be perpetuating a manifestly wrong bargain,” the court observed, adding that the firm “cannot be permitted to escape with a nominal liability for its default.”
Considering the delay involved, the judgment found 9% interest to be insufficient, considering the plight of the buyer. “Keeping in mind the overall conduct of the respondent: the delay caused by it in offering the plot, the fact that the respondent charged the appellant delay compensation @ 18% p.a. on the due amount, and the long wait that the appellant had to endure over a period of a decade, causing harassment and anxiety, which are writ large, we find that this is an appropriate case where refund of the principal amount with interest @ 9% p.a., as awarded by the NCDRC, will not serve the ends of justice,” the court said.
The Supreme Court modified the NCDRC ruling and directed the developer to refund the homebuyer’s principal amount with 18% simple interest from the date of payment until refund within two months.
The case involves a buyer who had booked a plot in the Park Land project in 2006 in Haryana for ₹36.03 lakh. He paid around ₹28 lakh in the next five years but instead of being allotted the plot, the builder sought to allot an ‘alternative plot’ to him and charged an additional sum for it. Despite payments totaling ₹43.13 lakh by 2015, the plot was not delivered, and the company charged the buyer 18% interest for alleged payment delays. Sharma terminated the agreement in 2017 and approached the NCDRC in 2018. In January 2023, the NCDRC ordered the firm to refund the principal with 9% interest and ₹25,000 in litigation costs. Dissatisfied, the buyer approached the Supreme Court.
Legal experts have welcomed the ruling. Sunil Tyagi, Managing Partner, ZEUS Law Associates, told HT.com, “The principle of fairness and parity has been applied in this matter as it is essential to protect the homebuyers for the harassment and delay caused by the developer in handing over the possession of booked plots/ units. This judgement would act as a deterrent for the builders and set an important precedent on the consequences of delayed project handovers. Although, interest of 18% was granted on the refundable sums in the aforementioned case, nevertheless, it has been made clear that the exact amount of interest will depend on each individual matter and should not be regarded as a general norm.”
Frequently Asked Questions
What did the Supreme Court rule in favor of homebuyers?
The Supreme Court ruled that real estate developers must pay the same 18% interest for delayed possession as they charge buyers for late payments.
Why was the 9% interest rate deemed inadequate by the Supreme Court?
The Supreme Court found 9% interest inadequate due to the long wait and harassment caused to the buyer, and the fact that the developer charged 18% interest for late payments.
What was the original award by the NCDRC?
The NCDRC originally ordered the developer to refund the principal amount with 9% interest and ₹25,000 in litigation costs.
How long did the buyer wait for the plot in the Park Land project?
The buyer waited over a decade for the plot, paying a total of ₹43.13 lakh by 2015.
What is the significance of this ruling for future cases?
This ruling sets an important precedent for fairness and parity in real estate transactions, acting as a deterrent for developers who delay project handovers.
Related News Articles
Luxury Redefined: Ceratec Group Unveils Presidential Towers in Ravet, Pune
Discover the epitome of luxury living with Ceratec Group's latest project, Presidential Towers, offering 2 and 3 BHK homes in the heart of Ravet, Pune.
Rexas Finance (RXS) Price Forecast: Will It Be a Top Performer in 2025?
Rexas Finance (RXS) is making waves in the financial sector with its innovative approach to asset management. From real estate to art and goods, RXS offers a user-friendly interface for seamless asset trading and management. This article explores the pote
Government Hikes: Ordinary Citizens Bear the Brunt in Karnataka
With a series of tax and price hikes, the Karnataka government is placing a significant financial burden on ordinary citizens. From fuel and liquor to milk and water, the costs are rising, while the government contemplates more increases in property tax,
Port Sector Development: Key Focus in My Third Term, Vadhavan Port Underway
In a significant push towards infrastructure development, the port sector has emerged as a key focus area in my third term. The work on the Vadhavan port has already begun, marking a crucial milestone in this initiative.
Women Lead the Charge in India's Real Estate Market
Women investors are increasingly making their mark in both residential and commercial real estate in India, shattering traditional gender barriers and driving market growth.
Housing Loans Reach ₹33.53 Trillion in Q2FY25: NHB
The National Housing Bank (NHB) reports that housing loans outstanding have reached ₹33.53 trillion in the second quarter of FY25, signaling a promising outlook for the housing sector.