Incorporation Of One-sided And Unreasonable Clauses In Apartment Buyer's Agreement Constitutes An 'Unfair Trade Practice': Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that the incorporation of one-sided and unreasonable clauses in the Apartment Buyer's Agreement constitutes an unfair trade practice under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act.The bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra and Indira Banerjee observed that the Developer cannot compel the apartment buyers to be bound by the one-sided. The Supreme Court has held that the incorporation of one-sided and unreasonable clauses in the Apartment Buyer's Agreement constitutes an unfair trade practice under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act. The following issues were raised in the appeal before the Apex Court: Determination of the date from which the 42 months period for handing over possession is to be calculated under Clause 13.3, whether it would be from the date of issuance of the Fire NOC as contended by the Developer; or, from the date of sanction of the Building Plans, as contended by the Apartment Buyers; Whether the terms of the Apartment Buyer's Agreement were one-sided, and the Apartment Buyers would not be bound by the same; Whether the provisions of the Real Estate Act, 2016 must be given primacy over the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; Whether on account of the inordinate delay in handing over possession, the Apartment Buyers were entitled to terminate the agreement, and claim refund of the amounts deposited with interest. "We are of the view that the incorporation of such one-sided and unreasonable clauses in the Apartment Buyer's Agreement constitutes an unfair trade practice under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act.