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

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, RAJAN SHARMA
Manish Jain – Appellant
Versus
Parsvnath Developers Ltd. – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Sandeep Kumar, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Rakesh Bhardwaj and T.P Chauhan, Advocates

JUDGMENT

Dr. Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, President.—Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the Complainant booked a Residential flat in the project of the Opposite Party by the name and style of “Parsvnath Preston” located at Sonepat, Haryana and paid the registration advance of Rs. 1, 43, 000/- on 31.12.2007, vide cheque no. 871323 drawn on HDFC Bank, New Delhi.

2. Having made the payment, which was duly acknowledged by the Opposite Party, a residential flat bearing No. T4-804, admeasuring 1310 sq. ft. was provisionally allotted to the Complainant vide allotment letter dated 17.01.2008. The total sale consideration of the aforesaid flat was mutually agreed between the parties at Rs. 28,67,220/- which included the Basic Sale price, EDC, IDC and car parking charges.

3. The Complainant further deposited an amount of Rs. 2,87,083/-, which was duly acknowledged by the Opposite Party vide receipt no. S0066754. Pursuant thereto, the Parties entered into a flat buyer agreement dated 28.02.2008 for the aforesaid flat, which specifically mentioned that the possession of the flat shall be delivered within 36 months from the date of start of foundation of the

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