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

V.K.JAIN
Goverdhan Nopany – Appellant
Versus
Bengal Unitech Universal Infrastructure Private Limited – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Mr. Gaurav Ghosh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. Palzer Moktan and Ms. Arushi Arora, Advocates

ORDER

V.K. Jain, Presiding Member

The complainant booked a residential flat with the opposite party in a project, namely, ‘Unitech Cascades’ which the opposite party was to develop in Uniworld City, Kolkata. The sale consideration for the said residential apartment was agreed at Rs.13396383/-. The parties then executed a Buyers Agreement on 18.4.2007 in respect of the aforesaid transaction. As per clause 5a(i) of the agreement, the possession was to be delivered to the complainant by 30.6.2010. The possession, however, was delivered to him on 12.5.2012. The possession was accepted by the complainant under protest and on the possession certificate, he made an endorsement to the effect that he would note down the points of protests in a different sheet of paper to the builder. There is no evidence of any such sheet noting down the points of protests having been sent to the OP, but, the complainant claims to have sent a letter dated 13.8.2012 to the opposite party complaining of some defects in the apartment. No photocopy of the said letter has been filed. The typed copy of the said letter to the extent it is relevant, reads as under:-

“It is on record the above apartments possession w

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