RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA
Neeraj Chowdhary – Appellant
Versus
BPTP Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
Ram Surat Ram Maurya, Presiding Member.—Heard Mr. Navneet Kumar, Advocate, for the complainants and Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma, Advocate and Ms. Nidhi Tewari, Advocate, for the opposite parties.
2. Aforementioned complaint has filed for directing the opposite parties (i) to refund each and every buyer, the amount paid by him/her with interest @18% per annum, from respective date of deposit till the date of refund, in respect of the apartment booked by him/her in the project “Park Sentosa”, at village Nimka, Sector-77, tehsil and district Faridabad, (ii) to pay compensation to each and every buyer @ Rs.5/- per sq.ft. per month on ‘super area’, for the period of delay in offering possession of the flats booked by them, (iii) to pay Rs.5/- lacs, to each and every buyers, as compensation for mental agony and harassment, (iv) to pay Rs.50000/- to each and every buyers, as cost of litigation, (v) to award benefits of the subvention plan to the complainants, who had opted for the same, (vi) to impose appropriate penalty upon the opposite parties for indulging in unfair trade practice and (vii) any other relief which is deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
3. The co
Ambrish Kumar Shukla & Ors. v. Ferrous Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.
Rameshwar Prasad Shrivastava and Ors. v. Dwarkadhir Projects Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.
Vikrant Singh Malik and others v. Supertech Limited and others
Pioneer Urban Land & Infrastructure Ltd. v. Govind Raghvan
NBCC (India) Ltd. v. Shri Ram Trivedi
Bangalore Development Authority v. Syndicate Bank
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.