Back
INDER JIT SINGH
Anil Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Mahagun (India) Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER
The present First Appeal (FA) has been filed by the Appellants against Respondent as detailed above, under section 19 of Consumer Protection Act 1986, against the order dated 15.05.2017 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, U.P., (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”), in Consumer Complaint (CC) no 149 of 2015 inter alia praying to:—
(a) Restrain the respondent from creating any third party interest/right with respect to the Appellants’ flat No. 06091, 6th Floor, having built up area 910 sq.ft. (super area 1110 sq.ft.), in group housing residential complex “Mahagun MIPL-My Woods, Phase-1”, situated at GH-04, Sector-16C, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh during the pendency of the appeal;
(b) Grant ad-interim ex-parte stay order, staying the operation of impugned final judgment and order dated 15.05.2017 passed by the State Commission.
2. Notice was issued to the Respondent on 16.06.2017. Respondent/OP was directed to maintain the status-quo over the disputed property subject to Appellant depositing Rs.15 lacs with the State Commission. The Appellants and the Respondent filed their Written Arguments/Synopsis on 27.07.2022 and 29.07.2022 respectively.
Order of possession - The unit in question has already been transferred/allotted by Respondent to third party, and OP has already refunded the entire principal amount paid by the Petitioner, it may n....
(1) Justified Withholding of Payments – An allottee is not necessarily “at fault” for stopping installments if it is evident that the builder is nowhere near completing the project by the committed d....
Flat Buyer’s Agreement – Denial of timely possession despite substantial payment – Payment of interest on refund of principal amount is necessary.
One-sided contractual terms - Appellant-Builder cannot seek to bind the Respondent with such one-sided contractual terms.
Settled law that Executing Courts cannot go behind the Decree
(1) Contract - A term of a contract, will not be final and binding if it is shown that the consent to the said term was not really voluntary, if the person giving consent had no other choice. (2) Nom....
Delay in allotment of flat – Challenge to bar of pecuniary jurisdiction has to be raised at the first instance & cannot be permitted at the appellate stage.
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
