When real estate projects are delayed, buyers often turn to the RERA mechanism for relief. Developers, however, present various reasons to justify or excuse the delay. Some of these reasons are legally valid, while others are rejected by the authorities. This post provides homebuyers with a clear understanding of the most common defences used by builders for Delay in Delivery of Flats under Tamil Nadu RERA and explains how these are treated legally.
1. Force Majeure: Genuine, but Not a Blanket Excuse
Builders frequently cite force majeure to justify delays. Under Section 6 of RERA, force majeure includes unforeseeable natural events like floods, earthquakes, or pandemics.
- Example: During the COVID-19 lockdowns, TNRERA granted a blanket 5–6 month extension to projects.
- Legal Requirement: The builder must prove that the force majeure directly prevented progress and that all efforts were made to minimize delays.
- Case Example: In the Ozone Projects case (Anna Nagar, Chennai), the builder cited floods and cyclones. Yet, TNRERA found that the delay extended far beyond what those events justified, and ordered refund with interest and additional compensation.
Key Takeaway: Only the portion of delay directly linked to a certified force majeure event is excused.
2. Delay in Government Approvals: Not Always a Valid Defense
Builders often blame delays on pending regulatory approvals like plan sanctions or occupancy certificates.
- Contract Clauses: Many builder agreements list regulatory or policy changes as permissible delays.
- RERA Position: Obtaining approvals is part of the developer’s responsibility.
- Judicial View: In a Supreme Court ruling, it was held that failure to obtain occupancy certificate is the developer’s fault and does not excuse delay.
Example: In several Tamil Nadu RERA cases, delays in obtaining occupancy certificates were rejected as valid defenses, with authorities reaffirming that such tasks fall squarely within the builder’s legal obligations.
Key Takeaway: Only unexpected and extraordinary government delays may justify timeline extensions; routine approval delays are not accepted.
3. Buyer’s Default or Consent: Only Valid if Proven
Developers sometimes claim that the buyer caused the delay, such as:
- Making payments late
- Requesting mid-project customizations
- Agreeing to revised timelines
TNRERA considers such defenses only if:
- There is clear proof of buyer default
- The buyer genuinely consented to new delivery timelines
Case Insight: If the buyer paid all dues on time, TNRERA typically holds the builder fully liable for delay.
Key Takeaway: Builders must provide solid evidence to prove buyer default. Otherwise, statutory rights prevail.
4. Contractual Grace Period and Low Compensation Clauses
Many sale agreements contain a 3–6 month grace period beyond the promised date for delivery, and token compensation clauses such as ₹5–₹10 per sq. ft. per month for delays.
- RERA View: Reasonable grace periods are acceptable. Complaints filed before the grace ends may be dismissed.
- Supreme Court View: In Wg. Cdr. Arifur Rahman Khan v. DLF Southern Homes Pvt. Ltd. (2020), the Court held that buyers are not bound by token penalty clauses if their actual losses are higher.
Key Takeaway: Buyers can still claim fair compensation even if the agreement has minimal penalty provisions.
5. Other Excuses: Economic Slowdown, Liquidity, and Labor Shortage
Builders occasionally cite market downturns, cash flow issues, or labor/material shortages.
- Legal Standing: These are not recognized as valid legal defenses under RERA.
- Why? Because they are part of the developer’s business risk.
- Buyer Rights: Buyers cannot be forced to accept alternative offers (like rent or substitute flats) in place of their statutory remedies.
Key Takeaway: Market and internal financial challenges are not valid excuses for delay.
Conclusion: Most Builder Defenses Fail Under Legal Scrutiny
While builders may raise several defenses to justify delay, Tamil Nadu RERA and the courts prioritize homebuyer rights. Force majeure may allow limited time extensions. Government delays are not always accepted. Buyer consent and defaults must be proven. Token compensation clauses do not override statutory entitlements.
Courts and authorities have consistently held that unjustified delays cannot be excused merely by citing internal or external challenges. Buyers retain their rights to seek refund, interest, and compensation when possession is not delivered on time.
If a flat is delayed, buyers should assess whether any of the builder’s excuses hold legal merit. Often, they do not. In such cases, buyers have full rights to seek refund, interest, and compensation through TNRERA.
Need Help? Consult a qualified RERA lawyer to evaluate your case and file the right complaint. Don’t let vague defenses dilute your right to justice.
Disclaimer: This post is for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a competent real estate lawyer.
