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

K.C.BHARGAVA, D.D.BAHUGUNA
MANORAMA SINGH – Appellant
Versus
LUCKNOW DEV. AUTHORITY – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complaint :Mr. M.H. Khan, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party : None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—The present complaint has been filed claiming an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as damages and compensation with a direction to give possession of house after receiving the rest of the amount of the original price at Rs. 4,50,000/- by opposite party.

2. It is alleged that the opposite party had advertised for residential house in Nehru Enclave, Gomti Nagar Housing Scheme, Lucknow under ‘deferred payment system’ of hire purchase. The complainant applied for a house in the said scheme for four room Super Delux flat and deposited Rs. 30,000/- on 27.3.1989. The cost of the house was declared to be Rs. 4,51,001/- to be paid in instalments. An allotment letter dated 12.10.1990 was issued in favour of the complainant of a ground floor flat No. 8R/123 in category known as “Roopayan”. A photostat copy of that letter is attached as Annexure to the complaint. The price was to be paid in seven instalments of Rs. 18,750/- each every quarter. On 30.10.1990 complainant sent a sum of Rs. 18,750/- as first instalment. The complainant also demanded copy of challan to be sent on his Ghaziabad address. The complainant paid a sum of Rs. 1,31,250/- in seven instalments















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