By S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors · Published 14 March 2026 · Informational content, not legal advice
About this article: A general explainer prepared by S&S Co. Advocates & Solicitors on a recurring type of dispute. It does not report a specific judgment or order, names no parties and gives no case citation, so it should not be cited as authority. Law and practice change; please verify against the current statute and primary sources before relying on it.
Homebuyers whose possession is delayed beyond the committed date often approach a consumer commission under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, treating the delay as deficiency in service. A remedy may also be available before the state Real Estate Regulatory Authority under RERA, and the choice between the two forums needs thought.
Developers commonly answer with force majeure, citing market conditions or supply-chain disruption. Commissions generally expect the developer to show how a specific event affected this project's schedule and when. A general reference to conditions across the sector, without project-specific evidence, is unlikely to excuse a long delay.
Where the delay is established, compensation is often expressed as interest on the amounts the buyer paid, for the period of delay, with refund of charges not disclosed in the allotment terms. Such interest is generally understood as compensating the buyer for money locked into the project rather than as a penalty, so it is tied to the actual delay period. Rates and heads differ from case to case.
Key Points
- Delay in handing over possession is commonly treated as deficiency in service.
- A force majeure plea needs project-specific evidence, not a general reference to market conditions.
- A remedy may also be available before the state RERA authority, and the two forums should be considered together.