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

R.K.AGRAWAL, S.M.KANTIKAR, BINOY KUMAR
Muzamil Mattoo – Appellant
Versus
Emaar MGF Land Limited – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Ms. Harshika Verma, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. Rajeev Agarwal, Advocate

ORDER

The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 12(1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by Muzamil Mattoo and Mrs. Neha Godara (hereinafter referred to as the Complainants) against Opposite Party, M/s. Emaar MGF Land Limited (hereinafter referred to as the OP Developer), seeking possession of the Unit alongwith compensation for delay in delivery or in alternative refund of the amount paid towards purchase of Unit alongwith interest and costs as the Opposite Party Developer failed to deliver the Possession of the Unit within stipulated period, which was booked by them in the Project launched by the Developer in the name and style of “Emerald Floors” located at Sector—65, Urban Estate, Gurgaon, Haryana.

2. It has been averred in the Complaint that the Opposite Party Developer launched a Residential Project in the name and style of “Emerald Floors” located at Sector—65, Urban Estate, Gurgaon, Haryana (hereinafter referred to as the Project). The Complainants booked a Unit in the said Project by paying a booking sum of Rs.10 lakh to the OP Developer. Vide provisional allotment letter 13.09.2011, the Complainants were allotted Unit No. EFP-I

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