The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed 70 buyers who invested in Parsvnath’s Exotica project in Ghaziabad to withdraw their money because they were no longer keen to hold on to the flats, which are yet to be constructed.
It made scathing remarks against the developer for not completing the housing project within the deadline promised to the purchasers.
A bench headed by justice Dipak Misra asked the real estate developer to deposit Rs 10 crore with the SC registry till December 10. The company has already deposited Rs 12 crore. The bench gave liberty to the buyers to approach the registry and apply for refund, which will be done after verification of the documents.
“In this country, builders have developed an attitude to make commitments to the purchasers and not fulfil them by delaying the projects,” the bench said.
‘They (home buyers) do not have patience and trust in you and need refund. Money should go back to them and they should not suffer,” the bench told the company when they requested the court not to pass the refund order.
“Why do you get into all this business when you can’t pay back the money? You have to give back the money to home buyers,” the bench said.
The court order came on Parsvnath’s appeal challenging the national consumer court’s order directing the company to refund the money with interest to 70 flat buyers who had invested around Rs 17 crore.
During the hearing, the buyers’ counsel ML Lahoty submitted his clients wanted a refund, especially in the wake of Ghaziabad Development Authority’s order cancelling the allotment of the land.
Allowing Lahoty’s plea, the court said the payment of interest by the developer will be decided on December 15, the next hearing.
In an earlier hearing the company had expressed difficulty in paying back the money. It told the court more than 800 families had put in their money in Exotica project and all of them would seek refund if the court permits the 70 buyers to do so.
Launched in 2007, the project was to get over by 2011 but the company failed to fulfill its promise and construction work is still going on.
Before the top court the company assured it would hand over the possession of flats by the end of next year and also said the firm was ready to pay rental amount for delay in completing the project. But, that did not impress the court, which asked the company to deposit the money.