Terming Parsvnath Developers “deficient in providing services”, the Commission directed it to refund Rs 37 lakh paid to it by Pradeep Saraswat along with 6 per cent interest.
14-year delay in handing over flat: Parsvnath Developers directed to pay compensation of Rs 40 lakh to complainant
x
00:00
1x1.5x1.8x
The Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Parsvnath Developers to pay a compensation of Rs 40 lakh to a complainant over a delay in handing over the possession of a flat after noting that the firm was sitting on his hard-earned money for over 14 years.
Terming Parsvnath Developers “deficient in providing services”, the Commission directed it to refund Rs 37 lakh paid to it by Pradeep Saraswat along with 6 per cent interest. It further directed Parsvnath to pay Rs 2 lakh for causing mental agony and to cover Saraswat’s litigation costs.
“Consequently, we hold that the Opposite Party is deficient in providing its services to the Complainant as the Opposite Party had given false assurance to the Complainant with respect to the time for handing over possession of the said flat,” said Judge Rajan Sharma of the Commission in a judgment passed last month.
In 2008, the complainant and the firm had entered into an agreement whereby Parsvnath assured the buyer that he would get possession of the house within three years after the commencement of construction. The complainant had alleged that he had paid the developers according to their down payment plan which entailed paying 10 per cent of the total amount at the time of booking, 73 per cent within the next 45 days and 5 per cent at the time of possession. It was further alleged by the complainant that when he visited the site multiple times, he could not see even a single construction labourer working on it.
Parsvnath Developers, however, argued that the delay in completing the construction was not wilful and was caused due to the global economic slowdown experienced by the real estate sector in the country. It further argued that the complainant did not fit the criteria of being a ‘consumer’ under the Consumer Protection Act.
The court rejected these contentions of the opposite party and held that they had provided no documentary proof and were just relying on ‘bold statements’ to make their case against the complainant. It was further observed by the court that the possession was still not handed over to Saraswat.
Relying on the Consumer Protection Act, Parsvnath also held that the time for filing the complaint should be within two years from the date when the “cause of action has arisen”.
Story continues below this ad
The court rejected this argument as well, observing that Parsvnath had not refused to hand over possession of the flat to Saraswat at any time and constantly reassured him that the construction would be completed. The court therefore ruled that the cause of action was in favour of the complainant and the complaint filed by him was valid.
Lastly, the developers argued that the present case involved complicated questions of law which should be decided by a civil court instead of the consumers’ commission. The court, however, ruled that “nothing cogent” had been produced on record to show the complicated questions involved.
Nirbhay Thakur is a Senior Correspondent with The Indian Express who primarily covers district courts in Delhi and has reported on the trials of many high-profile cases since 2023.
Professional Background
Education: Nirbhay is an economics graduate from Delhi University.
Beats: His reporting spans the trial courts, and he occasionally interviews ambassadors and has a keen interest in doing data stories.
Specializations: He has a specific interest in data stories related to courts.
Core Strength: Nirbhay is known for tracking long-running legal sagas and providing meticulous updates on high-profile criminal trials.
Recent notable articles
In 2025, he has written long form articles and two investigations. Along with breaking many court stories, he has also done various exclusive stories.
1) A long form on Surender Koli, accused in the Nithari serial killings of 2006. He was acquitted after spending 2 decades in jail. was a branded man. Deemed the “cannibal" who allegedly lured children to his employer’s house in Noida, murdered them, and “ate their flesh” – his actions cited were cited as evidence of human depravity at its worst. However, the SC acquitted him finding various lapses in the investigation. The Indian Express spoke to his lawyers and traced the 2 decades journey.
2) For decades, the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) has been at the forefront of the Government’s national rankings, placed at No. 2 over the past two years alone. It has also been the crucible of campus activism, its protests often spilling into national debates, its student leaders going on to become the faces and voices of political parties of all hues and thoughts. The Indian Express looked at all court cases spanning over two decades and did an investigation.
3) Investigation on the 700 Delhi riots cases. The Indian Express found that in 17 of 93 acquittals (which amounted to 85% of the decided cases) in Delhi riots cases, courts red-flag ‘fabricated’ evidence and pulled up the police.
Signature Style
Nirbhay’s writing is characterized by its procedural depth. He excels at summarizing 400-page chargesheets and complex court orders into digestible news for the general public.
X (Twitter): @Nirbhaya99 ... Read More
