https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400434 Purchasers of residential flats were treated as consumers where bookings were for personal accommodation and housing loans or similar investment showed consumer status; delay and alleged force majeure did not excuse the admitted incomplete construction, so deficiency in service stood. The consumer complaint was also held maintainable because the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides an additional remedy, and the real-estate regime preserves other remedies; its bar on civil courts does not extend to consumer fora. Later registration of the project did not defer or curtail accrued contractual and statutory rights, so the allottees' entitlement to refund with interest and consequential relief remained intact. en-us Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2020 08:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400434 Purchasers of residential flats were treated as consumers where bookings were for personal accommodation and housing loans or similar investment showed consumer status; delay and alleged force majeure did not excuse the admitted incomplete construction, so deficiency in service stood. The consumer complaint was also held maintainable because the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides an additional remedy, and the real-estate regime preserves other remedies; its bar on civil courts does not extend to consumer fora. Later registration of the project did not defer or curtail accrued contractual and statutory rights, so the allottees' entitlement to refund with interest and consequential relief remained intact. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 02 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400434