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

LOKESHWAR PRASAD, RUMNITA MITTAL
ZAMSHED ALAM KHAN – Appellant
Versus
REGENCY INDUSTRIES LTD. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Complainant :Mr. K.D. Sharma, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties : None.

ORDER

Mr. Justice Lokeshwar Prasad, President—The complainant, named above, has filed the present complaint under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred as as ‘the Act’), averring that allured by the representations, made by the opposite parties, the complainant booked an apartment in the complex, known as ‘Regency Arch’ at Vaishali, District Ghaziabad (Uttar Pradesh), on 25th June, 1989 and deposited a sum of Rs. 48,000/- with the opposite parties for which a receipt, bearing No. 99, dated 8th July, 1989, was issued to the complainant by the opposite parties. It is further stated that in response to the application of the complainant, dated 25th June, 1989, the opposite parties provisionally allotted an apartment, bearing No. C-905, with an approximate built up area of 1015 sq. ft., on the 9th floor, of their above mentioned proposed residential complex. It is stated that the sale price of that apartment was agreed to be Rs. 4,85,125/-, i.e. at the rate of Rs. 475/- per sq. ft. of built up area, as per allotment letter dated 8th September, 1989. It is stated that thereafter the complainant requested the opposite parties to supply the details regarding













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