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

DINESH SINGH
NUDPL Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Saiprasad Natarajan – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Abir Phukan, Advocate with Mr. Ashkrit Tiwari, Advocate

ORDER

Dinesh Singh, Presiding Member—This Appeal has been filed under Section 19 of The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’, challenging the Order dated 24.07.2019 in C.C. No. 231 of 2017 passed by The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Karnataka, hereinafter referred to as the ‘State Commission’.

The Appellant herein, M/s NUDPL Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., was the Opposite Party before the State Commission, and is hereinafter being referred to as the ‘Builder Co.’.

The Respondents herein, Mr. Saiprasad Natrajan and Mrs. Shilpa Sundareshan, were the Complainants before the State Commission, and are hereinafter being referred to as the ‘Complainants’.

2. Heard the learned Counsel for the Builder Co. on admission.

Perused the material on record including inter alia the Order dated 24.07.2019 of the State Commission and the Memorandum of Appeal.

3. In the interest of justice, to provide fair opportunity to the Builder Co., to settle the matter on merit, the delay of 05 days in filing the Appeal is condoned.

4. The Complainants’ case before the State Commission was that they booked a residential unit with the Builder Co. for Rs. 81,24,360/-. An Agreement b

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