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

R.K.AGRAWAL, S.M.KANTIKAR
Apoorv Bansal – Appellant
Versus
Vatika Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Ms. Himani Aggarwal, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. Ayshwarya Chander, Advocate

ORDER

1. The present amended Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by the Complainant, Shri Apoorv Bansal against Opposite Party Builder, M/s. Vatika Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Builder’) seeking refund of the amount paid by him to the Builders towards purchase of the Residential Unit alongwith interest and compensation.

2. The facts as narrated in the Complaint are that the Complainant had booked a Residential Apartment in the Project, namely “Tranquil Heights – Vatika India Next”, Sector 82A, Gurgaon to be developed by the Opposite Party Builder, by paying a booking amount of Rs.8 lakh on 2.11.2013. The total Sale Consideration of the Apartment was Rs.1,36,25,625/- (Rupees One Crore Thirty Six Lakh Twenty Five Thousand Six Hundred and Twenty Five only) which was to be paid in terms of Construction Linked Plan. Vide Allotment Letter, dated 29.09.2014, the Complainant was allotted Unit No. E-703 located on 7th Floor in Tower No. E having Super Area of 2290 sq. ft. It is alleged by the Complainant

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