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

C.VISWANATH
Delhi Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Sandeep Gandotra – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Ms. Arti Bansal, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Gagan Gupta, Advocate

ORDER

C. Viswanath, Presiding Member.—The present Appeal, under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has been filed by the Appellant against the order dated 16.04.2013 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “the State Commission) in CC/230/2007.

2. Case of the Complainant/Respondent is that he was registered with the Appellant under its Vth Self Financing Scheme for allotment of a Category III Flat. The Complainant paid the Appellant Rs.15,000/- as registration fees and accordingly, the Appellant allotted a flat in his name in Mukherjee Nagar at an estimated cost of Rs.7,81,200/-, vide Allotment Letter dated 15.03.1994. According to the Complainant, the Allotment Letter was incomplete, as the list of approved financial institutions from where loan could be obtained for payment towards the flat, was not provided. In the absence of the list of approved financial institutions, he could not avail a loan for payment of 90% of the demand towards the flat allotted to him. He sought for the same from the DDA, vide letter dated 15.04.1994, but the same was not sent. Subsequently, vide letter dated 11.09.1996, the Appellant informed

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