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
PADAM CHANDRA SINGH – 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 7.7.1994 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1090 of 1993.

2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant had applied for an MIG house in Govindpuram Housing Scheme. He deposited the entire amount according to the payment schedule, when a house was reserved for him. The possession of the house was promised to be delivered to him in December, 1991. The complainant had also paid penal interest of Rs. 34,164/-. Even after depositing the amount of Rs. 1,75,000/- the possession has not been delivered. A notice was, therefore, given by the complainant on 1.9.1993 for delivering possession of the house. The complainant has prayed for delivery of the possession and interest at the rate of 18% per annum on deposited amount of Rs. 2,09,164/- and Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and Rs. 1,500/- per month as rent which has been paid by the complainant.

3. The opposite party in its written version has alleged that the complainant wanted a change in the house. Therefore, he was allotted a house in Govindpuram. The complainant deposited the entire amount alo

























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