In Brief
A land-owner in a real estate development collaboration agreement was made jointly and severally liable by the NCDRC for home-buyers' losses despite having undertaken no direct obligations to them. The Supreme Court held that Consumer Protection Act liability requires privity of contract and a breach of undertaken obligation. The land-owner's mere status as a confirming party and revenue-sharer did not establish liability. The Court set aside the order but remitted for reconsideration if home-buyers could amend pleadings to plead alternative theories (such as lifting of corporate veil or principal-agent relationship) with supporting evidence, reserving the land-owner's right to contest jurisdiction and new contentions.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.