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

R.K.AGRAWAL, S.M.KANTIKAR, BINOY KUMAR
Shreya Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Mr. Sushil Kaushik, Ms. Himanshi Singh and Mr. Ram Naresh Yadav, Advocates
For the Opp. Parties:Mr. Shivkant Arora, Advocate

ORDER

1. The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21(a) (i) read with Sections 2(b) (iv) and 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by the Complainants, in the representative capacity, agitating their joint, personal as well as collective grievance against the Opposite Parties, M/s. Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd. and M/s. Samyak Projects Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Developer’) for the inordinate delay in handing over possession of the Flats booked by them in the Project under the name and style of “Ansal Heights” (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”) proposed to be developed by the Developer at Sector 92, Gurgaon, Haryana.

2. Vide Order, dated 11.07.2017, the Complaint initially filed on behalf of the 12 Complainants, was allowed to be treated as a Joint Complaint u/s 12 (1) (c) of the Act on behalf of all the Allottees of the said Project. Further, vide Order dated 10.05.2019, a notice was also directed to be published u/s 13(6) of the Act in the Newspapers. During the proceedings of the case, I.A. Nos. 2

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