Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
SUDIP AHLUWALIA, MEMBER, ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, MEMBER
SARITA DEVI AGARWAL – Appellant
Versus
KOLKATA WEST INTERNATIONAL CITY PRIVATE LIMITED – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis states complainant’s agreement terms and payments with builder. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposite party counters with jurisdictional and procedural arguments. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. legal reasoning confirms right to refunds based on delivered service. (Para 14 , 18) |
| 4. court emphasizes deficiency of service due to construction delays. (Para 15 , 16 , 19) |
| 5. court orders refund and costs based on findings of contractual breach. (Para 20 , 21) |
ORDER
JUSTICE SUDIP AHLUWALIA, MEMBER
This Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Opposite Party and, seeking refund of the deposited amount along with ancillary reliefs.
2. The factual background, in brief, is that the Complainant saw an advertisement issued by the Opposite Party in 2006 announcing a large residential township to be developed at NH-6, Salap Junction, Howrah-711 403. Seeking a peaceful home near Kolkata for herself and her husband, she visited the Opposite Party’s office at Chowringhee Court in November’ 2006. The Company officials assured her that construction would be completed within a fixed schedule and supp
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
