STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER, MR. PREETINDER SINGH, MEMBER
MS. SURJIT KAUR – Appellant
Versus
MANOHAR INFRASTRUCTURE & CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. deficiency in service due to lack of amenities. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. opposite parties contest validity of complaint. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. basic amenities and completion certificate are required. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. consumer rights violated due to improper possession. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. order for restoration of rights and compensation. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
RAJESH K. ARYA, PRESIDING MEMBER
Factual scenario:-
It is the case of the complainant that despite the fact that substantial amount stood received from her by the opposite parties against the plot located in their project, details of which are given below, they (opposite parties) failed to develop the same by the committed date and in order to evade their liability, paper possession was offered to the complainant and that too in the absence of basic amenities, which is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is also not accompanied with completion certificate. It has been stated that even the terms and conditions contained in the agreement i.e. buyers agreement and draft maintenance agreement are wholly one sided and heavily loaded in favour of the opposite parties and nothing has
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.