Back
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Dr. Sadhna Shanker, Member
Mrs. Rajni Suryakant Gujar – Appellant
Versus
Shree Vinayaka Developers – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding consumer status and liability (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court's analysis of consumer definition and fraud (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. ratio decidendi on the consumer definition (Para 14) |
| 5. conclusion and order of dismissal (Para 16) |
ORDER
DR. SADHNA SHANKER, MEMBER
1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 19 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short “the Act”) in challenge to the Order dated 08.06.2016 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra (hereinafter referred to as the “State Commission”) in complaint no. 364 of 2013 whereby the complaint was dismissed.
2 Brief facts of the case are that the complainants initially purchased a plot admeasuring 3.5 Aars from Survey No. 43/2/2, situated at Undri, Pune, for a total consideration of Rs. 18,00,000/- and a sale deed was executed in favour of the complainants. Subsequently, the complainants decided to purchase Plot No. 2, admeasuring 7000 sq. ft., at Survey No. 43/2/4/1, 43/1 /1/4A/13, 43/1/1/4A/13, 43/1/1/4A/6 and 43/1/2/4 at Undri, Pune and in respect thereof, a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was executed on 09
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
