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

DEEPA SHARMA
Harish Jain – Appellant
Versus
Ramprastha Promoters and Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Mr. Sushil Kaushik, Advocate

ORDER

Deepa Sharma, Presiding Member.—This order shall dispose of the Consumer Complaints No.2089, 2090, 2091, 2092 and 2093 of 2016 since all the Complaints are against the same Opposite Parties and relate to the same project and the facts in all the cases are similar. Facts are being taken from Consumer Complaint No.2089 of 2016.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the Complainants had booked a flat in the project “RISE” of the Opposite Parties in RP City, Sector 37 D, Gurgaon, Haryana. The details are as under:

Complaint No.

Date of booking

Total amount paid

Proposed date

Date of execution of Builder Buyer Agreement

2089 of 2016

26.03.2012

Rs.67,77,234/-

30.09.2015

28.08.2012

2090 of 2016

09.12.2011

Rs.62,09,154/-

30.09.2015

02.11.2012

2091 of 2016

22.11.2011

Rs.62,87,222/-

30.09.2015

15.12.2012

2092 of 2016

02.04.2012

Rs.66,20,645/-

30.09.2015

14.09.2012

2093 of 2016

02.04.2012

Rs.68,58,904/-

30.09.2015

20.07.2012

3. The case of the Complainants is that the Opposite Parties had promised to

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