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

MANOJIT MANDAL, SAMIKSHA BHATTACHARYA, SHYAMAL KUMAR GHOSH
Goutam Roy Chowdhury – Appellant
Versus
Design O Execution – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Prabir Basu, Ms. Sritama Mondal, Advocates
For the Opp. Parties: None Appears

ORDER

Manojit Mandal, President—The instant complaint under section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 ( in short, ‘the Act’) is at the instance of the complainant against the Developer/Builder Opposite Party No.1 and the land owners on the allegation of deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties in a consumer dispute of housing construction.

2. In a capsulated form, the complaint case is that the complainant herein entered into an agreement with the opposite parties on 21/03/2016 (subsequently notarized on 10th of May, 2016) for purchase of a flat at the 4th floor, south-west side, measuring 350 sq. ft. of super built up area consisting of two bedrooms, one dining room, one kitchen, one toilet, one W.C., one verandah and one car parking space measuring 135 sq. ft. at the ground floor at premises No.9, Brojomohan Mondal Road, East Rajpur, P.O. Santoshpur, P.S. Purba Jadavpur, now Survey Park, Kolkata - 700 075 and accordingly, the complainant paid Rs.18,00,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Lakh) only upon execution of agreement for purchase of the said flat together with the car parking space.

3. Further case of the complainant is that it was agreed that the construction

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