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

K. SURENDRA MOHAN, AJITH KUMAR D., BEENAKUMARI A., RADHAKRISHNAN K. R.
Maruthi Habitat and Realtors India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Manoj K. Mathew – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellant:Denny Varghese, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Ajith Kumar D., Judicial Member—This is an appeal filed by the opposite parties 1 to 3 in C.C. No. 348 of 2016 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ernakulam (District Commission for short).

2. The District Commission as per the order dated 28.01.2023 directed the appellants and other opposite parties to pay the complainants Rs. 10,50,000/- being the amount received by the opposite parties, to pay Rs. 10,000/- as compensation and Rs. 5,000/- costs.

3. The complainants are the respondents 1 & 2 and the other opposite parties are the remaining respondents in the appeal.

4. The allegations contained in the complaint in brief are that the 1st opposite party is a Company by name “Maruti Habitat & Realtors India Pvt. Ltd.” engaged in the construction of Apartments and Villas. The 2nd opposite party is the Managing Director and opposite parties 3 to 6 are the Promoters and Directors of the 1st opposite party.

5. The complainants on 22.12.2008 had entered into an agreement with the 7th and 8th opposite parties for purchasing 1.54% of undivided interest in the total area of land consisting of 63.680 cents for a total consideration of Rs. 50,000/-. On that day

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