Back
K. SURENDRA MOHAN, AJITH KUMAR D., RADHAKRISHNAN K. R.
Mary Johny – Appellant
Versus
Madhuraj – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ajith Kumar D., Judicial Member—The appellant is the complainant in C.C.No.411/2014 on the file of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Kozhikode (the District Forum for short). The District Forum has dismissed the complaint as per the order dated 17.12.2014. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the appeal has been filed.
2. The appellant had originally filed a complaint before the District Forum Malappuram as C.C.No.148/2012. Later, as per the order of the State Commission dated 10.06.2014, in transfer application No.01/2014 the case was transferred from the District Forum, Malappuram which was taken on file as C.C.No.411/2014 of the District Forum, Kozhikode. The pleadings contained in the complaint in brief are as follows:
3. The opposite parties were conducting the business of construction Villas in the name and style as Alloos Builders. The opposite parties had contacted the complainant and they had entered into an agreement to construct a residential building of 1082sq.ft. with a compound wall, gate and bore well. The opposite parties assured that the construction would be completed and possession of the premises would be given before 23.12.2012. A written a
Remand – Ordering a remand would cause additional hardships to the parties to the list as no useful purpose would be served in doing so.
Commercial Purpose — All shop rooms are commercial buildings, at the time of issuing building permits. This is not the deciding factor that the complainant was planning to use the shop for commercial....
Absence of Evidence – In the absence of evidence produced by the complainant in the form of terms of contract entered into between the parties, bills for such alleged items procured in excess, and ev....
Owing of House – The desire of a person to own a house of his own is sacred and sacrosanct. It was to satisfy the said desire of the complainant that he had parted with such a huge amount, raising pa....
(1) Consumer Protection Act - Complainant has chosen his remedy under the Consumer Protection Act, his complaint before this Commission is perfectly maintainable and there is no embargo in proceeding....
Separate Agreement – Complainant would submit that no separate agreement was executed, since the opposite parties had agreed to carry out the construction as per the rate agreed in Exhibit A1 with re....
Adequate Compensation – The conduct of the complainants in this regard is to mislead this Commission. But that alone may not be a ground to deprive the complainants from seeking adequate compensation....
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
