In a stinging rebuke to a real estate developer, the Supreme Court on 24 September 2025 ordered Business Park Town Planners Ltd. to refund the entire principal amount paid by homebuyer Rajnesh Sharma with 18% annual interest, sharply increasing the 9% interest earlier fixed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC).
Background
Rajnesh Sharma booked a residential plot in the company’s “Park Land” project back in March 2006 for about ₹36 lakh, paying over ₹43 lakh over the years with added charges and interest. Possession was promised within two years of plan approval. Instead, after repeated delays and even an alternative plot allotment in 2011, the builder finally offered possession only in May 2018, demanding more money for fresh charges like electricity and sewage treatment.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Upholds Divorce Citing Wife's Refusal of Marital Relations and Parental Alienation
Frustrated, Sharma terminated the agreement in 2017 and approached the NCDRC seeking refund and hefty compensation for loss of property value. The consumer forum ordered a refund with 9% simple interest—but without Sharma’s consent to that rate.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, Justice Dipankar Datta, writing for the bench also comprising Justice Augustine George Masih, did not mince words. “The builder charged the buyer 18% for every late payment,” the bench observed, “yet seeks to escape with 9% when it defaults. Such a manifestly one-sided bargain cannot be allowed.”
The Court rejected the developer’s defence that higher interest to the buyer requires proof of “actual loss,” noting that the decade-long delay, shifting of plot location without proper statutory reason, and continuous harassment were self-evident. The judges also scrutinised the builder’s invocation of a clause permitting layout changes, remarking that no government order had been shown to justify the alternative allotment.
Decision
Finding the earlier relief inadequate, the Supreme Court raised the refund interest to 18% per annum, matching the penalty the builder itself imposed on Sharma for any delay in his payments. All other directions of the NCDRC, including the refund of the principal amount and ₹25,000 litigation costs, remain. The company must pay within two months from the date of judgment.
Case: Rajnesh Sharma v. Business Park Town Planners Ltd.
Case Type: Civil Appeal No. 3988 of 2023
Judgment Date: 24 September 2025
