Builders cannot impose maintenance fees unless they have an OC: NCDRC.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ruled that builders cannot charge maintenance fees to buyers who are forced to take possession and begin living in their flats without an Occupancy Certificate (OC) due to delays on the part of builders in obtaining all necessary clearances from the authorities.

As per apex consumer forum, homebuyers will be supposed to pay maintenance charges for their flats only after the builder receives an Occupancy Certificate from the civic authority, and it is inappropriate for builders to request it even if the flat buyers begin residing in their flats after taking possession. It stated that if the builder fails to receive OC, it appears to mean that the construction is not yet completed and that the flat will then be viewed only as “paper possession” if it is handed across to the buyers.

The NCDRC granted the petition of a group of 15 Bengaluru homebuyers led by Harinder Singh who were forced to pay maintenance fees by a builder after taking possession of their flats without OC. Their lawyer, Chandrachur Bhattacharya, contended before a bench of S M Kanitkar and Binoy Kumar that the buyers were forced to pay two years’ maintenance in advance while taking possession of the flats, for which the builder failed to obtain OC despite a six-year delay.

In response to the homebuyers’ petition, the builder VDB Whitefield Development Private Ltd claimed that the maintenance fee was necessary because it provided all amenities to those who had moved into their flats. It claimed that the delay in the project was caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, and that it was the buyers who forced it to give them physical possession of their units without OC.

The NCDRC, on the other hand, was not persuaded by the builders’ submission and allowed the homebuyers’ plea by relying on a recent Supreme Court judgement delivered in January and an earlier verdict of the Commission.

“With regard to the issue of maintenance fees, it is true that the complainants have physically taken possession of their respective units. It stands to reason that there would be a cost associated with the upkeep of certain common services. It is also true that the Occupancy Certificate has yet to be obtained. It indicates that the project is not yet finished and that not all services promised are being provided. “There should be no maintenance charge levied prior to obtaining the occupancy certificate,” it stated.