Back
R. K. AGRAWAL, S. M. KANTIKAR
Hubtown Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Vimal Bhannudas Varak – Respondent
ORDER
The present batch of the Revision Petitions under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”), has been filed by the Petitioners/Opposite Parties in the Complaint before the District Forum, assailing the Common Order dated 12.10.2018, passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, Mumbai (for short “the State Commission”) in First Appeal Nos.A/15/1001 to A/15/1031. By the impugned Order, the State Commission has dismissed all the First Appeals preferred by the Petitioners/Opposite Parties against the Common Order dated 30.04.2015 passed by the Consumer Grievances Redressal Forum, Mumbai Sub-Urban District (for short, “the District Forum”) in Complaint Nos.08/2009 to 38/2009 and upheld Order of the District Forum. By the said Order, the District Forum while partly allowing the Complaints filed by the Complainants, has directed the Petitioners/Opposite Parties to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- to each of the Complainants for mental torture and harassment within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the Order failing which the amount was to carry interest @18% p.a. from 07.01.2007 till actual payment. Besi
LAW POINTConcurrent finding “ there is a concurrent finding of deficient service on the part of the Petitioners by the Fora Below which does not warrant any interference from National Commission in R....
(1) Deficiency - the cause of inordinate delay in handing over the possession continues which is a clear cut deficiency on the part of the opposite party.(2) Deficiency of Service - the payments made....
Basic Amenities - In the present case, the Opposite Party Authority had completely failed to provide basic amenities like approach roads on the sides of the allotted Plots, which is a clear case of d....
Subsequent purchasers retain consumer rights under the Consumer Protection Act and can seek remedies for deficiencies in service from property developers.
“Complaint can be instituted only where all the opposite parties are actually and voluntarily residing.”
The court affirmed that housing construction agreements fall under the Consumer Protection Act, establishing that both parties were bound by the definitions of 'consumer' and 'service'.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
