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

RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA, INDER JIT SINGH
Yoginder Singh, Mrs. Usha Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ramprastha Promoters & Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Shivram, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Ms. R. Gayathri Manasa, Advocate

ORDER

Dr. Inder Jit Singh, Member—The present Consumer Complaint (CC) has been filed under Section 12(1)(c) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by the Complainant No.1 on behalf of/or for the benefit of all the persons including the other complainants who have been allotted a flat and who have common interest in the project and a common grievance against Opposite Party (OP) as detailed above in the Project namely, ‘The Edge Towers’ of the OP, inter alia praying for:—

(i) To direct the OP to complete construction and deliver possession to each of the complainants and to all persons/consumers on whose behalf and for whose benefit the present complaint is filed and who are interested in the said project, their respective flats in the said project, strictly in accordance with the specifications, sanctioned plans along with necessary common facilities and services as per ABA.

(ii) To direct the OP to pay compensation to all the allottees for delay in giving possession @ 18% p.a.

(iii) To restrain OP from demanding legal, Registration and deed of Apartment ch

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