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

V.B.GUPTA
Sunil Mantri Reality Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
K. Sreelatha – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate.

ORDER

V.B. Gupta, Presiding Member—In this revision petition, there is challenge to order dated 24.5.2012 passed by Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore (for short as ‘State Commission’) vide which appeal of the petitioner was dismissed at the admission stage.

2. Facts as emerges from record are that respondents/complainants in order to own a flat in Bangalore approached petitioner/opposite party and entered into sale and construction agreement, dated 14/11/2008 for purchase of Flat No.212 on 2nd Floor of Tower-2 Block in the project “Manthri Royal” along with one covered car parking in the basement floor for total sale consideration of Rs.37,70,247/-. At the instance of the petitioner, respondents paid Rs. 1,00,000/- on 07/11/2008 and Rs. 17,00,000/- on 14/11/2008, towards part of the sale consideration and agreed to pay the balance of sale consideration of Rs.19,70,247/- as and when demanded by the petitioner after completion of particular stage of construction and handing over the possession of the property. As per terms of the sale and construction agreement, petitioner failed to complete the construction work and even after lapse of three years from







































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