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

C.VISWANATH, RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
HUDA Now HSVP – Appellant
Versus
Rajesh Jindal – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Pardeep Dahiya, Advocate

ORDER

Heard Mr. Pardeep Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioners.

2. This revision has been filed against the order of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana at Panchkula, dated 04.07.2019, passed in First Appeal No. 119 of 2019 (arising out of the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum Rohtak, dated 05.04.2017, passed in, Consumer Complaint No. 512 of 2015), whereby, the complaint was allowed and the petitioners were directed (i) to transfer the disputed plot and execute conveyance deed in the name of the complainant, (ii) to remove electric transformer, poles, junction box, electric wires around the plot and to remove the encroachment from the plot and after removal of all the hindrance, give possession of the plot to the complainant, (iii) not to charge any interest, penalty, extension fee etc. from the complainant, (iv) to pay interest @ 9% per annum to the complainant on the amount deposited by him, from the date of deposit till actual physical possession and (v) to pay Rs.5000/- as litigation cost. Aforesaid directions had to be complied within one month, failing which, the opposite parties were directed to pay punitive damages of Rs.500/- per day fro

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