Ravi Datt Yadav VS Ansal Housing Ltd.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PINKI
Ravi Datt Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Ansal Housing Ltd. – Respondent

Counsel for the Parties:
For the Complainant:Mr. Ranjeet Singh Godara, Advocate
For the Opp. Party No.1:Mr. Shivkant Arora and Ms. Kanishka Pamecha, Advocates, Ms. Pritika Singh, AR

JUDGMENT

Sangita Dhingra Sehgal, (President)—The present Complaint has been filed before this Commission by the Complainant alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of Opposite Parties and has prayed for the following reliefs:—

i. to direct the Respondent No.1 to refund an amount of Rs.10,00,662/- paid towards the cost of the shop booked by complainant.

ii. to direct the Respondent No.1 to pay simple interest at @18% per annum from the dates of payments made to the Respondent No.1.

iii. to direct the Respondent No.2 to pay Rs.50,000/- towards penalty for providing incorrect information.

iv. to pay appropriate penalty for delay in completion of the project thereby causing mental agony to the Complainant.

v. to direct the Respondents to pay litigation cost; and to pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Forum may deem fit and proper in the light of the facts and circumstances of this case.

2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present Complaint are that the Complainant booked a shop bearing No.253, having an area of 550 sq. ft. at a total cost of Rs.36,30,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Six Lakh Thirty-Thousand Only) in a project named “Ansals Town