PAGE 1 OF 10
IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Date of Institution:2.09.2017
Date of Hearing: 20.03.2023
Date of Decision: 10.08.2023
COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 1659/2017
IN THE MATTER OF
1. MR. NAGESH KUMAR RANA,
S/O SH. KARAN SINGH RANA,
2. MRS. ANITA RANA,
W/O MR. NAGESH KUMAR RANA,
BOTH R/O: EC 125, MAYA ENCLAVE HARINAGAR,
SOUTH WEST, DELHI-110064.
(Through: Mr. Amiy Mishra, Advocate)
…Complainants
VERSUS
M/S. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD.,
THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN & FOUNDER:
MR. PRADEEP JAIN,
HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT:
6TH FLOOR, ARUNACHAL BUILDING,
19, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001.
(Through: KNM & Partners)
…Opposite Party
PAGE 2 OF 10
CORAM:
HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, (PRESIDENT)
HON’BLE MR. J.P. AGRAWAL, MEMBER (GENERAL)
Present: None for the Complainant.
Mr. S.M. Ansari, counsel for the OP.
PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL
(PRESIDENT)
JUDGEMENT
1. The present complaint has been filed by the Complainants before this Commission alleging deficiency of service and unfair trade practice by the Opposite Party and has prayed the following reliefs:
2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint that the Complainants jointly booked a plot bearing no. E-089 admeasuring 172 sq.
yards in the colony named “Parsvnath City” situated at Indore, Madhya Pradesh for the total consideration of Rs. 8,34,372/-. Thereafter, the Plot Buyer Agreement dated 10.07.2008 was executed between the contested parties. As per the said agreement, the Opposite Party assured the Complainants to develop the project and shall deliver the possession of the plot in question within 24 months i.e. on or before 10.07.2010. However, the Opposite Party failed to deliver the possession of the plot the Complainants.
Further, the Complainants made numerous visits to the office of Opposite PAGE 4 OF 10 Party and requested the Opposite Party to handover the possession of the plot but the Opposite Party did not give any heed to the requests of the Complainants. Till date, the Complainants have made a total payment of Rs.7,92,653/- as and when demanded by the Opposite Party for the said plot.
Also, the Complainants went to the construction site and got shocked to see that the development and construction work at the project site is not completed and the Opposite Party is not in the position to handover the possession of the plot to them. Therefore, alleging deficiency of service on the part of the Opposite Party, the Complainants approached this Commission.
3. The Opposite Party has contested the present case and has raised preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint case. The counsel of the Opposite Party contended that the Complainants are not ‘ consumers ’ under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as the said plot has been p
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.