In Brief
Twenty-six flat buyers in a Greater Noida real estate project filed a composite consumer complaint against the developer, seeking to proceed jointly under Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The NCDRC rejected the application, reasoning that separate agreements, different dates, varying sizes and prices meant there was no commonality. The Supreme Court held that Section 12(1)(c) requires only a 'sameness of interest'—a common grievance against the same service provider—not identical contractual terms. However, as pleaded, the complaint lacked the representative character necessary for such proceedings. The Court set aside the outright dismissal and remitted the case to the NCDRC to reconsider whether the complaint could proceed, with all objections (settlement, overlapping writ proceedings) left open for re-examination.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.