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

R.S.SHARMA, HEENA THAKKAR
C. G. HOUSING BOARD – Appellant
Versus
DHARMAPAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Manoj Prasad, Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

Mr. Justice R.S. Sharma, President - This appeal has been filed by the appellant (O.P.) under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (henceforth called "1986 Act") against the order dated 17.12.2013, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (C.G.) (henceforth called "District Forum"), in Complaint Case No. 135/2012, whereby the complaint filed by the complainant (respondent) under Section 12 of the 1986 Act, has been partly allowed and the appellant (O.P.) has been directed to pay Rs. 62,000 to the respondent (complainant) and also pay a sum of Rs.20,000 towards compensation for mental agony and Rs. 2,000 towards Advocate fee and cost of litigation.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case before the District Forum are that the complainant/respondent had purchased a house M.I.G. Duplex 123, Phase 4, Kabir Nagar, Raipur from the appellant (O.P.) and possession order was issued by the appellant (O.P.) in favour of the respondent (complainant) on 24.7.2010. On the basis of said possession order, the respondent (complainant) took possession of the said house on 19.8.2010. Prior to taking possession of the said house the respondent (complainant) inspecte

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