The Supreme Court, however, criticised the NCDRC’s approach, noting that the forum’s order defied logic, was perfunctory on certain aspects and had let off the flat developers in a manner contrary to law.
“Once the NCDRC arrived at a finding that the respondents were casual in their approach and had even resorted to unfair trade practice, it was its obligation to consider the appellants’ grievance objectively and upon application of mind and thereafter give its reasoned decision. If at all, the appellants had not forfeited any right by registration of the sale deeds and if indeed the respondents were remiss in providing any of the facilities/amenities as promised in the brochure/advertisement, it was the duty of the NCDRC to set things right,” the Supreme Court observed.
Source: Barandbench
