SC notice to Centre on PIL for uniform builder-buyer pact

Satya Prakash

Advertisement

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, October 4

The Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Centre on a PIL seeking uniform model builder-buyer agreement under the Real Estate Regulatory Authority (RERA) Act, 2016, for protecting the interests of homebuyers who often get duped by realtors.

Junks Supertech’s plea seeking modification

The SC on Monday refused to modify its directive to demolish the twin 40-story towers in Noida for violation of norms and dismissed an application of Supertech Ltd seeking to save one tower and partially demolish 224 units in the other to conform with building bylaws. PTI

“It is very important for consumer protection because builders try to put any number of clauses in the agreement which common people may not be aware of. There should be some uniformity in the agreement. It’s important that this (uniform model builder-buyer agreement) is achieved,” a Bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud said.

The Bench issued the notice after senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing petitioner Ashwini Upadhyay, submitted that some states have such model agreement, while some others don’t. To ensure uniformity in such agreements, the Centre should prepare a model builder-buyer agreement, he submitted.

Complaining that builders tried to influence the conditions to be incorporated in the agreement, Singh demanded that the Centre should frame the model agreement and direct all states and union territories to implement it.

On behalf of a homebuyers’ group, senior advocate Maneka Guruswamy supported the petitioner and sought a model builder-buyer agreement to safeguard consumers’ interests.

In his petition filed last year, Upadhyay, an advocate and Delhi BJP leader, sought a direction to all states and UTs to enforce “model builder-buyer agreement” and “model agent-buyer agreement” and to take steps to avoid “mental, physical and financial injury” to homebuyers.

He urged the top court to issue necessary directions to compensate homebuyers for losses incurred due to inordinate delays on the part of promoters-builders and to recover their money. Due to deliberate excessive delays in possession, real estate customers are not only suffering mental and financial injury, but also a brazen violation of their right to life and livelihood, Upadhyay submitted.