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

SUBHASH CHANDRA
Sadhna Shanker, MemberM/s. Universal Infrastructure – Appellant
Versus
Ravinder Kaur Bedi – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Mr. Punit Jain, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Siddharth Jain, Advocate

ORDER

Dr. Sadhna Shanker, Member—The present appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) by M/s Universal Infrastructure (hereinafter referred to as the “builder”) assailing the Order dated 03.06.2019 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in Complaint No. 39 of 2019 whereby the complaint filed by the complainants was partly allowed.

2. There is a delay of 110 days in filing the present appeal.

In the interest of justice and considering the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

3. The facts, in brief, are that the complainant, who was an NRI, was allotted a Flat No. 1001, Block Lyra, category 4-BHK, location 1th, Floor 10 in “The Taj Towers” located at Sector 104, Pearl City, Mohali and for which the complainant paid the total amount of Rs. 78,45,360/- to the builder. As per the agreement dated 17.08.2016 executed between the builder and the complainant, cost of the flat was Rs.65,60,000/-. It is alleged that the builder put the date on possession letter as 11.03.2016 wherea

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