Taking possession of a flat does not prevent homebuyers from raising complaints against real estate companies for deficiency in service. The Supreme Court of India has clarified that homebuyers are entitled to approach consumer forums to seek compensation for delayed possession even after they have taken physical possession of their flats. The court set aside an earlier order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which had ruled that once a buyer takes possession of a flat, they cease to be a “consumer” and are therefore barred from claiming compensation for delay. Rejecting this reasoning, the Supreme Court held that accepting possession does not extinguish a buyer’s right to claim relief for deficiencies that occurred prior to possession. The court further ruled that the presence of an arbitration clause in a homebuyer–developer agreement does not bar the buyer from approaching consumer forums. It emphasized that statutory remedies available under consumer protection laws are independent and additional remedies, and cannot be overridden by private contractual clauses. Once a consumer complaint is validly filed and admitted, the buyer cannot be forced out of the consumer forum merely because the agreement provides for arbitration. In this case, the homebuyer had taken possession of a flat in a housing project located in Dwarka in the National Capital Region more than two decades ago. Despite the long lapse of time, the court allowed the buyer to pursue compensation for the delay in handing over possession. It observed that the grievance was not about delivery of possession itself, but about the delay that occurred before possession was finally granted. The court clarified that a claim for compensation for delayed possession necessarily arises from the period prior to the actual handover of the flat. Merely receiving possession at a later stage cannot, by itself, nullify the buyer’s right to seek adjudication of a claim for compensation arising out of such delay. The allottee’s rights survive even after possession is taken. Accordingly, the Supreme Court revived a consumer complaint that had been filed before the district consumer forum in 2005 and directed the forum to decide, within one year, whether there was a delay in handing over possession and whether compensation was warranted. The ruling reinforces the principle that consumer protection laws provide strong and continuing remedies to homebuyers, and that neither possession nor arbitration clauses can defeat a buyer’s statutory right to seek redress for deficiencies in service by real estate developers.