The Supreme Court on November 8 said that a model builder-buyer agreement (BBA) is required for the real-estate sector and the Centre should file its reply on the issue by November 22 as it is an "important matter in the public interest".
The bench was informed on November 8 that no vakalatnama had been filed on behalf of the Centre.
“This is an important matter where the issue is about the need to frame a model builder-buyer agreement under the RERA. The government has the power to do so... a group of homebuyers has come to the court. This is not an adversarial matter. This is a very important issue of public interest. Kindly help us,” a bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna told Additional Solicitor General KM Nataraj and asked him to seek instruction and file the reply by November 22.
The SC asked the petitioner in-person advocate Ashwini Upadhyay to prepare a short note on the issue and share it along with the petition with the law officer.
On October 4, the Supreme Court had issued a notice to the Centre, asking it to frame model agreements for the builder-buyer and the agent-buyer deals to bring in more transparency in the real-estate sector.
The model agreements must conform with the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 to ensure protection for consumers, the apex court had said.
A uniform builder-buyer agreement is required to be framed by the Centre to protect interests of lakhs of homebuyers, a Supreme Court bench led by Justice DY Chandrachud had said.
An equal platform
A public interest litigation (PIL) has been filed by advocate and BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay, seeking a direction to all states to enforce a model builder-buyer agreement and a model agent-buyer agreement and to take steps to avoid "mental, physical and financial injury" to customers.
"Promoters, builders and agents use manifestly arbitrary one-sided agreements that do not place customers at an equal platform with them, which offends Articles 14, 15, 21 of the Constitution. There have been many cases of deliberate inordinate delays in handing over possession and customers lodge complaints but the police don't register FIRs, citing arbitrary clauses of the agreement," the PIL has said.
“Builders issue revised delivery schedule again and again and adopt arbitrary unfair restrictive trade practices. All this amounts to criminal conspiracy, fraud, cheating, criminal breach of trust, dishonestly inducing delivery of the property, dishonest misappropriation of property and violation of corporate laws," it added.
It has also sought directions to compensate the buyers for losses incurred due to inordinate delays on the part of promoters-builders and to recover their money.
The housing ministry had earlier brought out a model builder-buyer agreement for residential projects, but no state had adopted it fully. Only Union Territories have notified the agreement in complete alignment with the central rules.
Homebuyers had welcomed the move by the apex court.
Abhay Upadhyay, president of The Forum for People’s Collective Efforts (FPCE), and member of the Central Advisory Council, RERA, had told Moneycontrol that while a model builder-buyer agreement exists, most states have notified their own version to suit their requirements.
A Maharashtra BBA is different from a Karnataka BBA. Most BBAs followed by states are in violation of RERA. The Centre should notify a model BBA which should be applicable pan-India and should be in sync with RERA. "This is a positive step and much required,” Upadhyay had said.
Discover the latest Business News, Sensex, and Nifty updates. Obtain Personal Finance insights, tax queries, and expert opinions on Moneycontrol or download the Moneycontrol App to stay updated!
