Homebuyers can't be penalised for developer's default: Supreme Court [04.09.2026]

The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the Noida Authority’s penalty for delayed construction of two housing projects under insolvency proceedings, ruling that homebuyers and the successful resolution applicant cannot be made to pay for delays caused by the original developer.

The top court was hearing a plea by homebuyers of Noida’s Lotus Boulevard and Lotus Panache projects, developed by Granite Gate Properties Private Limited, who challenged a July 2025 order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) directing them to pay “time extension” charges to the Noida Authority.

The developer had taken two plots on lease from the authority to build high-rise apartments. However, after facing financial difficulties, it entered the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), with the homebuyers constituting the Committee of Creditors (CoC). A resolution plan by SMV Agencies Private Limited was later approved, making it the successful resolution applicant.

During the insolvency process, the homebuyers pooled their money under a CoC-approved “Pool and Build” mechanism to continue construction. However, the Noida Authority sealed three towers of Lotus Panache on October 16, 2024, over unpaid time extension charges.

Homebuyers cannot be made to pay for the “past sins” of the Corporate Debtor, the court held.

A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran said, “The project was to be completed in the year 2016, and despite another decade having passed, the homebuyers are still left in the lurch. The essential purpose of development would fail if Noida brings in a stipulation of payment of default charges,” according to a Hindustan Times report.

“The homebuyers and the SRA (Successful Resolution Applicant) are sought to be penalised for past sins of the Corporate Debtor, which cannot be allowed, especially in the context of the authority imposing penalty, ie: the local authority being concerned essentially with the development of the area under its control,” the bench observed.


05 Sep 2026