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

R.K.AGRAWAL, M.SHREESHA
Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Sharma – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Sanchar Anand, Advocate

ORDER

Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellants and perused the impugned order dated 22.02.2018, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the State Commission), whereby the Complaint, preferred by the Respondent herein, has been allowed and the Petitioners have been directed to refund to the Respondent a sum of Rs.63,30,750/-, along with interest @ 8% compounded annually from the various dates of deposit till actual payment, as also pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the Complainant and Rs.21,000/- as litigation expenses.

It is not in dispute that the Respondent/Complainant was an allottee of residential apartment in the Scheme, namely “Purab Premium Apartments”, floated by the Appellants in Sector-88, SAS Nagar, Mohali. The Letter of Intent was issued on 22.05.2012. The construction work could not be completed within the stipulated period of 36 months, where-upon the Respondent vide letter dated 01.07.2016 expressed his desire to withdraw from the Scheme and requested for refund of the entire amount deposited by him, along with interest @ 8% compounded 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