Skip to main content

Real estate developers can’t force homebuyers to go for arbitration


NCDRC says that Consumer Protection Act prevails over laws related to arbitration

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) has provided relief to home buyers who cannot pursue cases against developers due to a conflict in the law concerned.

According to lawyers, many cases were pending in different consumer forums because developers had included a clause that disputes between two parties would be first settled though a private resolution mechanism, also known as arbitration.The Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy available to individuals, and it is usually not affected by other Acts in force.

But in 2015 the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was changed. The new changes said that a judicial authority has to refer for arbitration those cases where a provision for arbitration had been included in the agreement.

“In cases where builders had included the arbitration clause, they appealed to consumer forums to not admit cases and refer them for arbitration, based on the changes made in the law,” says advocate Sushil Kaushik, who contested the case on behalf of around 40 buyers. “But the NCDRC ruled that real estate players cannot force buyers to settle their disputes through arbitration by restraining them from approaching consumer forums,” adds Kaushik.

This judgement brings massive relief to buyers seeking relief from consumer courts.

Lawyers say many cases were pending because the law was not settled on this. It was left to the discretion of the judges (or presidents) hearing the case. The recent ruling now settles the law.

The bench ordered: “We unhesitatingly reject the arguments on behalf of the builder, and hold that the arbitration clause in the aforementioned kind of agreements (read builder-buyer agreements) between complainants and builders circumscribe the jurisdiction of a consumer fora, notwithstanding amendments made in the Arbitration Act.”

Arun Saxena, founder and president of the International Consumer Rights Protection Council, explains: “Section 3 of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) clearly states that the CPA is in addition to, and not in derogation of, the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Consumer courts, therefore, have full right to entertain complaints even if there was an arbitration clause in the agreement with the builder.”

Consumer activists and lawyers say that developers pushed consumers to go for arbitration because these proceedings can be influenced and money power can play a big role in such cases. In arbitration, the builder and the consumer appoint their lawyers and try to settle the case. “The fees of such lawyers are also high and most consumers cannot afford them,” says Kaushik.

Builders usually create builderbuyer agreements that are tilted in their favour. Consumer don’t understand the technicalities unless they get into a dispute and get trapped in litigation. Courts have also taken cognisance of such lopsided agreements and awarded relief to consumers. “Developers at times don’t even share a copy of the agreement with the purchaser,” says Saxena.

In recent times, however, courts have started taking strict actions against errant builders. “The number of cases against developers has been on rise in recent years. The courts realise that the consumers have little option to get a fair deal when developers use laws to keep things in their favour,” says Abhishek Khare, founder and managing partner, Khare Legal Chambers.

Business Standard, New Delhi, 19th July 2017

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

At 18%, GST Rate to be Less Taxing for Most Goods

About 70% of all goods and some consumer durables likely to cost less

A number of goods such as cosmetics, shaving creams, shampoo, toothpaste, soap, plastics, paints and some consumer durables could become cheaper under the proposed goods and services tax (GST) regime as most items are likely to be subject to the rate of 18% rather than the higher one of 28%.

India is likely to rely on the effective tax rate currently applicable on a commodity to get a fix on the GST slab, said a government official, allowing most goods to make it to the lower bracket.

For instance, if an item comes within the 12% excise slab but the effective tax is 8% due to abatement, then the latter will be considered for GST fitment.

Going by this formulation, about 70% of all goods could fall in the 18% bracket.

The GST Council has finalised a four-tier tax structure of 5%, 12%, 18% and 28% but has left room for the highest slab to be pegged at 40%. A committee of officials will work out the fitment and the council…

Firms with sales below Rs.50 crore out of ambit

The tax department has reiterated that the PoEM rules, which require foreign firms to pay taxes in India if the effective control is here, will not apply to companies withaturnover of Rs.50 crore or less inafinancial year. Last month, the tax department had come out with the longawaited Place of Effective Management (PoEM) rules, which require foreign companies in India and Indian firms with overseas subsidiaries to pay local taxes if their businesses are effectively controlled by Indians. Then the rules did not setathreshold above which they were to apply. However, the accompanying press release states that the rules will not apply to companies withaturnover of up to Rs.50 crore inayear. That created confusion whether the threshold will be adhered to. Inacircular to clarify things, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) said the provision "shall not apply toacompany havingaturnover or gross receipts of ~50 crore or less inafinancial year".

PoEM rules essentially target shell …