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

R.K.AGRAWAL, DINESH SINGH
Skycity Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Seema Singhal – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Mr. Mukand Gupta, Advocate
For the Respondents:Mr. H.P.S. Ghuman, Advocate

ORDER

R.K. Agrawal, President.—The present Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 27.03.2018 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Punjab, Chandigarh (hereinafter to be referred to as “State Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Complainants was allowed and M/s. Skycity Builders & Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Opposite Party No. 1’) was directed to refund Rs.36,00,000/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the respective dates of deposit till realization as per Rule 17 of the PAPRA; pay a sum of Rs.4,12,000/- received by the Complainant as an Assured Return to OPs and adjusted by the OPs in the account of OPs; pay Rs.1,00,000/- compensation for mental agony and harassment and pay Rs.21,000/- towards litigation expenses.

2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the Complaint are that the Opposite Party No. 1 had launched a Shopping Complex Project under the name and style of “City Heart” (hereinafter referred to as the Project) at NH-21, Chandigarh-Kharar Road, Kharar. Alluring by the advertisements and the pictures shown of the Project by the Opposite Party, the Complainants entered into an agreement with Opp

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