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

N.K.JAIN, PRAMILA S.KUMAR
CHITRA SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
M. P. HOUSING BOARD – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellant :Mr. Mohan Chouksey, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Mr. Nitin Pandit, Advocate.

ORDER

Mr. Justice N.K. Jain, President—Both these appeals No. 266/2005 by complainant-allottee and No. 570/2005 by opposite party the M.P. Housing Board arise from the order dated 31.1.2005 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Bhopal in Case No. 540/2004 directing the opposite party Board to refund Rs. 4,35,000 with interest @ 12% p.a. from the date of last deposit i.e., 12.5.2001.

2. The grievance of the complainant is that the interest ought to be allowed from the dates of various deposits. The opposite party-Board challenges the very order allowing interest and claims that the Board is entitled to deduct 10% of the said amount.

3. The amount in question was deposited against allotment of a house which as per opposite party’s own showing was to be constructed and delivered to the complainant by June 2001. However, the house could be ready for delivery only in April 2004. Initially the price of the house was fixed at Rs. 6,50,000 but ultimately escalated price Rs. 7,62,482 was demanded from the complainant. It was a clear case of deficiency per se on the part of the opposite party Board firstly on account of inordinate delay in completion of construction and seco





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