Sukhbir Singh VS BPTP Limited

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

R. K. AGRAWAL, S. M. KANTIKAR
Sukhbir Singh – Appellant
Versus
BPTP Limited – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainants:Mr. V.V. Manoharan, Advocate
For the Opp. Party:Mr. Pragyan Pradip Sharma and Ms. Nidhi Tewari, Advocates

ORDER

The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) against Opposite Party M/s. BPTP Limited (hereinafter referred to as Opposite Party Builder), by Dr. Sukhbir Singh and his wife Mrs. Sunita Singh, Complainants/Allottees of Residential Flat in a Group Housing Project, namely, “Park Prime Mansions” (for short “the Project”), to be developed and constructed by the Opposite Party Builder in Sector 66, Gurgaon, Haryana, seeking possession of the Unit alongwith compensation for the losses suffered by them on account of Unfair and Restrictive Trade Practices adopted and the deficient services rendered by the Opposite Party Builder in not handing over the possession of the allotted Apartment/Unit within the stipulated time.

2. According to the Complainants, facts of the case are that allured by the advertisements and the various lucrative representations made by the Officials and Brokers of the Opposite Party Builder that the Flats in the Project will be delivered within a period of 36 months, the Complainants jointly booked a Flat, i.e., Unit No. MA-3-404, admeasuring 2764 sq. ft. on 05.05.2010 by paying a sum o