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

AJIT BHARIHOKE, ANUP K.THAKUR
DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Himanshu Arora – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Krishnan Venugopal, Sr. Advocate Assisted by Mr. Akarshan Sahay, Mr. Uday Rathore and Ms. Seema Sundd, Advocates
For the Respondent in FA/123/2017 to 128/2017, FA No.156/2017 to 161/2017, FA No.163/2017 to 166/2017, FA/293/2017, FA/312/2017, FA No.318/2017 and 319/2017:Mr. Narender Yadav, Mr. Anand Prakash and Mr. Anand Prakash, Advocates
For the Respondent in FA No.129/2017:Mr. Parveen Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.130 to 133 of 2017, FA No.167/2017, FA No.294 of 2017 and FA/1491/2017:Mr. Naveen Sheokand, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.134/2017, FA No.286 to 288/2017 and FA No.291/2017:Mr. Sudhir Kathpalia, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.162/2017:Mr. Sukaam Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.289/2017:Mr. Sukaam Gupta, Advocate, Proxy Counsel for Mr. Mukund Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.297/2017, FA No.296/2017 and 295/2017:Mr. Naveen Sheokand, Advocate, Proxy Counsel for Mr. Surender Deswal, Advocate
For the Respondent in FA No.321 and 644/2017:Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, Advocate
For the Remaining Respondents: Nemo

ORDER

Ajit Bharihoke, Presiding Member—By this order, we propose to dispose of the above noted appeals preferred by the opposite party developer against three common orders of the State Commission, UT Chandigarh dated 5.12.2016, 3.1.2017 and 9.1.2017 involving similar question of fact

2. Briefly stated, the facts relevant for the disposal of the appeals are that appellant opposite parties undertook to develop a residential group housing project “The Valley” situated in Sector 3, Kalka-Pinjore Urban Complex. The respondents complainants booked flats in the aforesaid project on various dates and paid certain amounts against the consideration agreed between the parties. The appellant opposite party executed independent Floor Buyers Agreement in favour of the respondents complainants allotting independent floors / flats to the complainants alongwith parking.

3. As per the agreement, the appellant opposite party subject to Force Majeure clause was required to deliver possession of the unit booked by the respective complainants within 24 months from the date of execution of the respe








































































































































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