DEEPA SHARMA, C.VISWANATH
Rasheed Ahmad Usmani – Appellant
Versus
DLF Ltd. (through its Chairman & MD) DLF Centre – Respondent
ORDER
This complaint initially was filed by nine complainants and the notice of the complaint under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Act was issued by way of publication advertisement in “Times of India” for 30.11.2015. Vide order dated 30.11.2015, numerous impleadment applications, filed by flat owners, were allowed and the amended complaint was ordered to be filed. Thereafter, the complainants moved an application under Section 12 (1) (c) of the Act after seeking permission from the Commission on 05.05.2017. Arguments were heard on this application on 30.10.2017 and vide order dated 21.11.2017 following directions were issued by this Commission:
“(i) The complainants are permitted to file this complaint on behalf or for the benefit of all such flat buyers who are interested in all the reliefs sought in this complaint;
(ii) The flat buyers, who have already executed the conveyance deed or who have already executed affidavits accepting agreed compensation in full and final satisfaction or who have already received possession of their respective flats within the stipulated time per
Nahal Chand Pvt. Ltd. vs. Panchali Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. (2010) 9 SCC 536. (Para 369)
Synco Industries, Vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur
Manohar Lal Sharma vs. D.D.A & Ors. 1994 (1) CPJ 29 (NC). (Para 433)
Yash Bir Jaggi vs. Unitech Ltd. IV (2006) CPJ 123 (NC). (Para 433)
M/s L & T Ltd. and Anr. Vs. State of Karnataka (2014) 1 SCC 708. (Para 439)
DLF Ltd. vs. Manohan Lowe (2014) 12 SCC 231: (2013) 8 Supreme 738. (Para 458)
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.