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
NARESH CHAND – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. R.P. Srivastava, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice K.C. Bhargava, President—This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 6.10.1997 passed by District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 793/95.

2. The facts of the case stated in brief are that the complainant applied for a house in Govindpuram Housing Scheme Anukampa 1988 and deposited a sum of Rs. 17,520/- as registration money. The entire cost of the house amounting to Rs. 2,11,374/- was deposited by 30.8.1991. Thereafter, the complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 24,400/- as enhanced cost alongwith lease rent of Rs. 5,711/- and Rs. 1,143/- as free-hold charges till 12.6.1995. The house is not worth living as has also been indicated in the Commission’s Report dated 1.1.1996. The complainant has claimed interest at the rate of 24% per annum till the possession is delivered to him. The opposite party in its written version has admitted that all the development work has been completed and the houses are complete in all respect. It is alleged that due to unavoidable circumstances, the possession of the house could not be delivered in time as there was a stay order of the Hon’ble High Court. The stay order of the Hon’ble High Court remained in force












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