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

S.N.KAPOOR, B.K.TAIMNI
Leena Kalra – Appellant
Versus
Chief Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. S.S. Gulati, Advocate.

ORDER

B.K. Taimni, Member— Petitioner was the complainant before the District Forum, where she had filed a complaint alleging deficiency in service on the part of the respondent.

2. Very briefly stated the facts of the case are that the complainant was allotted residential plot No. 309 situated in Sector 45, Gurgaon on 19.2.1998 for a tentative price of Rs. 11,97,200. It was her case that after some time she changed her residential address and informed the same to the respondents in the year 2000. Since the basic facilities were not being provided and development work was not being completed, she was not paying the installments regularly. When she went to enquire about the status of development work, basic amenities in the site in August, 2004, she was told that the plot has been resumed in 2002 vide resumption order. Against that order she filed an appeal on 17.8.2004 but the same was dismissed vide order dated 10.3.2005. Against this order, she made a representation to the Principal Secretary and Financial Commissioner vide letter dated 15.7.2005 but no action had been taken. It is in these circumstances a complaint was filed before the District Forum who allowed the complaint an







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