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

K.C.BHARGAVA, D.D.BAHUGUNA
GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Appellant
Versus
KAMLESH – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Ram Raj, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 11.11.1999 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 335/1997.

2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for a plot in Hastinapuram Scheme and deposited the entire amount by the year 1995. The complainant has not been handed over possession of the land allotted till now. The complainant was told that on account of some unavoidable reasons the said scheme has been abandoned and the possession cannot be given. It was intimated to the complainant that the deposited amount be taken back by him alongwith 5% interest.

3. The opposite party in the written statement had admitted abandonment of the scheme on account of some unavoidable circumstances. Therefore, the amount is to be refunded.

4. The learned District Forum, after considering the case of the parties, allowed the complaint and ordered for return of the money deposited by the complainant alongwith 18% per annum interest. A sum of Rs. 2,000/- was also awarded as compensation and Rs. 200/- as cost of the litigation. It was further ordered that if the amount is not paid within a perio













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