Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
A.P. Sahi, President, Bharatkumar Pandya, Member
Rickers Estate Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Macrotech Developer Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complainant's allegations regarding transaction details. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. timeline of events and requests for action. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. opposite party's objections regarding the process. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. details regarding the allotment process and payments. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. contentions on limitation and cause of action. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 6. court's analysis of the complainant's claims. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 7. principle of continuing wrong analyzed. (Para 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 8. determination of limitation and suppression of facts. (Para 19 , 21) |
| 9. denial of the complaint based on insufficient cause of action. (Para 20 , 22) |
ORDER
1. The present complaint has been instituted urging that the complainant had acquired a residential unit from the opposite party, the cost of the unit being Rs.13,16,15,460/-. As against the aforesaid price a sum of Rs.3,00,00,000/- is stated .to have been transferred to M/s. Shreeniwas Cotton Mills. The opposite party has stepped into its shoes after merger with the opposite party. The allegations in the complaint are that according to the agreed schedule, despite regular requests, the opposite party did not enter into any agreement to sell and a letter was
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
