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

RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA, INDER JIT SINGH
Dipendra Rawat – Appellant
Versus
Emaar MGF Land Ltd. – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Aditya Singh and Mr. J.S. Arya, Advocates
For the Opp. Party:Mr. Sunil Mund and Mr. Kumar Ankit, Advocates

ORDER

Dr. Inder Jit Singh, Member—The present Consumer Complaint (CC) has been filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act,1986( for short ‘the Act’) by the Complainant against Opposite party (OP) as detailed above, inter alia praying for:—

(i) To direct OP to refund Rs. 88,58,937/- along with interest @ 24 % p.a. from the date of each payment by the Complainant, the rate at which, the OP has collected the late payment from the Complainant.

(ii) Or in alternative, direct the OP to deliver fully completed unit to Complainant along with compensation for delay w.e.f. 08.08.2015 calculated @ 24% p.a. on amount deposited by the Complainant.

(iii) To direct OP to pay Rs.10 lakhs as compensation towards mental agony and harassment to the Complainant.

2. Notice was issued to OP on 13.08.2018, giving them 30 days time to file written statement.

3. It is averred in the Complaint that:—

(i) The complainant booked a residential apartment with the OP in a project namely ‘Palm Gardens’ which the OP was to develop in Sector 83 of Gurgaon. The booking was made on 23.4.2011 paying a

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