Section 18 RERA confers an absolute right to interest for delayed possession, overriding Section 55 Contract Act.

The Respondents (Allottees) booked an apartment in the Appellant's (Promoter) project "Wintergreen." An allotment letter dated October 1, 2011, and a subsequent agreement dated March 26, 2013, fixed the possession date as February 2016

Upon the Promoter's failure to deliver possession, the Allottees filed a complaint in 2018 under Section 31 of the RERA Act

The Promoter contended that they had informed the Allottees of delays and revised timelines via various communications (2015–2017), which the Allottees allegedly accepted by continuing payments

While the first Authority (MahaRERA) disposed of the complaint with liberty to seek interest later, the Appellate Tribunal quashed that order and directed the Promoter to pay interest from March 1, 2016, till actual possession

The Promoter appealed to the High Court

1. Whether in view of provisions of Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the acceptance of delayed performance would disentitle the promisee from compensation claimed on account of non-performance of contract at the agreed time?

2. Whether the provisions of Section 18 of the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (RERA) will override the provisions of Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

3. Whether in view of provisions of Section 32 of Indian Contract Act, 1872, the force majeure events listed in the contract could have been ignored?

The Court applied Section 18 of the RERA Act, 2016, which mandates the payment of interest for delayed possession if the allottee does not withdraw from the project

It relied on the Supreme Court precedents Imperia Structures Ltd. v. Anil Patni and Newtech Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P., which established that the right to interest under Section 18(1) is an "unqualified, unconditional absolute right" not dependent on contingencies

Section 89 of RERA was applied to give the Act overriding effect over inconsistent provisions in other laws

Conversely, Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, generally requires a promisee to give notice of intention to claim compensation when accepting delayed performance

The Court reasoned that while Section 55 of the Contract Act seeks to qualify the right to compensation with a notice requirement, Section 18 of RERA—a special, beneficial, and retroactive statute—confers an "indefeasible" and "absolute" right to interest for every month of delay

The Court held that interpreting Section 55 to require a notice of intention would run contrary to the legislative intent of RERA and the Supreme Court's mandate in Newtech, which places the allottee's right beyond such stipulatory fetters

The Court found that the construction-linked payment schedule meant that continuing payments did not constitute a waiver of the right to claim interest

Regarding force majeure, the Court noted that since the agreed possession date (February 2016) preceded the COVID-19 pandemic, the Promoter could not invoke subsequent lockdown periods to escape liability

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Appellate Tribunal's order. Execution was stayed for four weeks.