Fresh period of Limitation to run on continuous breach of contract NCDRC

Veena Jain had booked an apartment in "Wave Gardens" at Mohali. She was provisionally allotted a duplex apartment ad measuring 3,275 sq.ft., costing Rs 1,32,63,750/. The project was to be developed within 30 months, with a grace period of six months, and delivery was to be given by November 6, 2015. Jain paid a total to Rs 68,50,836/. In December 2015, she visited the site to check the status of the project and found that there was no development activity. Yet, the builder sent a demand letter on January 15, 2016, demanding a further amount of about Rs 42,28,063/, following up with another demand letter dated July 7, 2018, threatening to levy interest for delay in payment. In January 2020, Jain demanded a refund of the amounts paid by her along with interest. The builder ignored the demand and wrote to Jain in July 2020 asking her to take possession. The builder contested the complaint, contending that it was barred by limitation. The builder constested before the Mohali District Forum in August 2020 complanining about deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. The builder contested the complaint, contending that it was barred by limitation. The builder contested the compalint, contending that it was barred by limitation. The builder also argued that a flat purchaser was not entitled to claim a refund after the Occupancy Certificate was obtained and possession was offered. The District Commission observed that the last instalment was paid on September 9, 2014, so limitation of two years would be computed from that date. It held that the complaint filed in August 2020 was highly time barred and dismissed her appeal. Accordingly, by order dated November 4, 2024 delivered by Dr. Inder Jit Singh, the National Commission set aside the orders and directed the builder to refund the money with 9% interest within a period of 45 days,and if delayed pay 12% interest.
 

https://www.livehomes.in/news_letter