SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

D.R.VITHAL RAO, SUSHEELA CHELUVARAJU
GRUHALAKSHMI HOUSING CO. (P) LTD. – Appellant
Versus
GARDEN CITY HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION – Respondent


ORDER

Mr. Justice D.R. Vithal Rao, President— In this complaint, the complainant-M/s. Gruhalakshmi Housing Co. (P) Ltd., under Section 17 r/w Sec. 12 of the Consumer Protection. Act, 1986, has sought compensation in a sum of Rs. 5,57,891.75 from the Opposite Party-M/s. Garden City Housing & Construction.

2. The complainant-a housing company, averred that it had entered into an agreement with the OP-another housing company for preparing a plan, develop and allot the plots to its members by the Opposite Party. The first agreement was on 15.6.1988. On 16.8.1989 another agreement was executed between them. Thereby the Opposite Party agreed to provide 120 sites in Sy. No. 70/1 of Srigandada Kaval, Yeshvanthpur Hobli, Bangalore North Taluk. The sites measured 30’x 40’ and 40’ x 60’ respectively.

3. The complainant, further averred, that at the instance of the Opposite Party, the complainant paid a sum of Rs. 22,000 / to an Architect-by name Prayarana for preparing the scheme. The Opposite Party failed to prepare the said scheme. The OP after some time agreed to form and develop a housing scheme for the members of the complainant’s company in Sy. No. 16 of Sunkadakatte of Bangalore North Tai














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top