Author: Ritu raj singh and College Name Bharati Vidyapeeth New Law College Pune
To the Point
Shelter is one of the most basic needs of people. It is one of the needs that is associated with every aspect of a person’s life including personal safety, well-being, dignified existence. In India, it is a constitutionally protected basic need, and described under the right to life, Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Even with the recognition of these rights, the real estate market has numerous long standing and serious problems, such as, delayed occupation of property, false advertisements, confusing plans and sketches, bad construction and other problems related to poor trade practices. These problems especially affect the people who have invested a significant portion of their lifesavings to purchase a property.
As a Consumer, people ought to have some basic rights specially with regards to a real estate purchases With this in mind, the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and the Real Estate (Regulations and Development) Act 2016, (RERA) have been designed to give protection to home buyers. With the laws and Act, home buyers are treated as “Customers” permitting them to seek corrective legal action for any deficiency of service provided by Builders, such as, refund, compensation, provision of premises, and/or correction of any problems. With the Act, RERA ensures accountability and transparency by requiring builders to declare and register building plans with the authorities, disclose information pertaining to the contracts, funds, and materials required for construction.
Judicial Activism have encouraged these acts by providing civil rights to the people and made the housing sector more regulated and people centric. In combination, with the CPA and RERA of rapid and positive judicial activism, the housing sector is more and more people centric.
Abstract
Under the Indian law, the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 and the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, two-hand law frameworks offer protection to buyers.
The construction of a building is considered a service under the law, and the buyer is considered a consumer. Therefore, the buyer of the service can lodge a complaint about the construction service provided by the builder, and the complaint can be addressed through the Consumer Protection Act, for example, if the builder is late in handing over the completed house/apartment to the consumer, if the builder has lower the standards of construction, of of there is a complaint of poor construction. RERA aims to ensure accountability and transparency of the builder. The builder cannot withdraw more than 30% of the funds of the escrow account. The buyer of a house can receive a delayed house for a full refund, and can receive interest and payments for compensation for the delay. There is a lot of jurisprudence in these two areas, so it is good for the consumer to be able to provide a portfolio of evidence and seek justice. The consumer has a lot of options.
Use of Legal Jargon
In India, housing and consumer laws give allottees legal protection against arbitrary and bad faith actions, as well as ultra vires acts, of builders and promoters. Under real estate transactions, a homebuyer is considered a “consumer” under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Section 2(7), as they “hire or avail services of construction” for a price. Delayed construction, construction of poor quality, and misrepresentation of facts are all grounds for a consumer to file a case before the appropriate Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. These are all examples of service deficiencies. The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) requires the registration of all projects, thus, builders have statutory obligations to follow. These obligations include following the sanctioned plans, maintaining escrow accounts, and completion within the set deadlines. Otherwise, there is a breach of legal obligations, which leads to financial damages as well as compensatory damages under Section 18. Concerning all of the above, the courts have ruled, repeatedly, that there are unilateral and unor unconscionable clauses that will be considered void ab initio within the construction and purchase contracts. Also, legal history states that liable builders must be given either the act to perform as legally obligated, or provide a repayment, and this must include the interest gained, or they must pay the mitigation damages. The same as construction promoters must pay mitigation damages, this should also be the same as construction promoters, for they have broken the clauses that include the construction contracts to deliver
The Proof
When proof is established, there is also a stronger relation to the “deficiency in service” or “unfair trade practice” under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA) in housing and consumer conflicts. Because most real astate transactions are documented, consumer cases hinge most often on documentary evidence which makes it easier for homebuyers to prove their cases. The most crucial documents are the Builder-Buyer Agreement which indentifies timelines for possession, costs, specifications, and the builder’s obligations under the contract. Any shifts in these relations strengthens the case of the consumer even more. Payment receipts, bank loan statements, and demand letters serve as proof of consideration paid, while brochures, advertisements, and project descriptions serve to misrepresent evidence if the builder does not provide the promised amenities. For delays, the absence of an Occupancy Certificate (OC), construction photographs that lack completion, and emails that acknowledge the absence of completion are strong evidence of delays. Structural defects, breach of construction contract, and construction completion with significant delays is also strong evidence with the builder. The construction delay is also evident through the Reports of the construction to determine if it is unreasonably delayed, along with the actuarial reports, and construction access records. The documents thorough the builder’s evidential burden also provide evidence of significant delay
Case Laws
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985):
This case first acknowledged the right to livelihood and shelter as integral to the right to life.
Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame (1990):
The Supreme Court observed that a proper home is fundamental to human dignity and the full development of every individual.
Chameli Singh v. State of U.P. (1996):
The court provided a holistic definition of the right to shelter, including adequate living space, a safe and decent structure, clean surroundings, and essential amenities like water and electricity.
Recent Supreme Court Ruling (September 2025):
In a recent significant judgment, the Supreme Court explicitly declared the right to housing a fundamental right and urged the government to establish a revival fund for stressed real estate projects, protecting genuine homebuyers from the collapse of projects due to insolvency proceedings.
Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta:
This pivotal case established that even statutory bodies involved in housing construction fall under the purview of the CPA, making them liable for deficient services.
Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govindan Raghavan (2018):
The Supreme Court reinforced that builders cannot impose one-sided, unfair clauses in builder-buyer agreements. The court held that such clauses, which often stipulate minimal compensation for developer delays while imposing heavy penalties on buyers for default, constitute an unfair trade practice.
Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Abhishek Khanna & Ors. (2021):
This judgment further solidified the precedent that one-sided contracts are not binding on homebuyers and affirmed the power of consumer courts to modify unfair terms.
Nikhil Kumar Garg & Anr. v. GardenView Abode Private Limited (2023):
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) directed a developer to refund the entire amount paid by homebuyers with interest due to significant delays, emphasizing that indefinite delays are unreasonable and buyers should not suffer.
Conclusion
In conclusion, India’s legal system for housing and consumer rights has changed significantly, moving from a builder-dominated setting to one that is more open and focused on the needs of consumers. Courts and legislators have reinforced protections for homebuyers who frequently invest their lifetime earnings in the hope of obtaining safe and respectable housing because they recognize housing Redefining accountability in the real estate industry has been greatly aided by laws like the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) and the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). In addition to classifying homebuyers as consumers, these laws offer practical remedies like compensation for mental suffering, interest on delayed possession, refunds, and structural defect correction. RERA has significantly increased transparency and decreased builder malpractices with its focus on required project registration, escrow procedures, and stringent disclosure requirements.
By invalidating biased contractual clauses and holding builders accountable for delays and flaws, court decisions have strengthened consumer rights even more. Despite persistent obstacles, the combined power of legislation and judicial activism guarantees that homebuyers are now legally empowered stakeholders rather than vulnerable ones. In the end, India’s dedication to justice, responsibility, and the defense of individual dignity in the housing market is reflected in the development of housing consumer rights.
FAQS
Who is a consumer in housing matters?
Any individual who purchases a home, apartment, or plot from a builder for their own use is considered a consumer. According to the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), a buyer becomes a “consumer” when they pay a builder or developer for their services. A buyer may still file a consumer complaint even if they buy the property as an investment rather than for a large-scale business.
Can buyers file complaints in both RERA and Consumer Court?
Yes. Buyers are free to choose either RERA or Consumer Court. The Supreme Court has clarified that both forums have jurisdiction over housing disputes. However, the buyer cannot take double compensation for the same issue. The case must be pursued in one forum at a time.
Can the builder change the layout plan without asking buyers?
No. Without the written consent of two-thirds of allottees, builders are not permitted to make significant changes.
If they do, purchasers may file a claim alleging unfair trade practices and request reimbursement or the reversal of the modifications.
Are booking amounts refundable?
Indeed. The booking fee must be reimbursed if a buyer cancels because of the builder’s negligence (delay, false promises, lack of approvals).
Large sums cannot be unfairly retained by builders. In cases where the builder is at fault, consumer courts frequently mandate a complete refund.
Can NRIs file cases for housing disputes in India?
Indeed. RERA and CPA grant NRIs the same rights as Indian citizens. They can use authorized representatives, online portals, or email to file complaints from overseas.
Can the builder charge me for a change in the floor plan?
No, not in a unilateral manner. Without the written approval of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the project’s allottees, a promoter is prohibited by RERA from making significant modifications to the approved plans, layout, or specifications.
Is buying a commercial property protected under the CPA?
In general, no, if the sole goal is to make money (i.e., a commercial venture). The Supreme Court clarifies, however, that purchasing a shop or apartment in order to make a living through self-employment (such as a doctor starting a small clinic) is still protected as a consumer service.
