SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 27689

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Ajaib Singh – Respondent


STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

CASES PERTAINING TO ORIGINAL ALLOTTEES: REFUND WITH

9% INTEREST AND CONSOLIDATED COMPENSATION/COSTS AS AWARDED BY THE DISTRICT COMMISSION

1) First Appeal No.410 of 2021 Date of institution : 23.11.2021 Date of decision : 13.07.2022 Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority, through Estate Officer, Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority (Bathinda Development Authority) PUDA/BDA Complex, Bhagu Road, Bathinda.

….Appellant/Opposite Party Versus Ajaib Singh son of Kamikar Singh, resident of Gas Agency Road, Budhlada, District Mansa.

….Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 05.04.2021 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Mansa.

2) First Appeal No.266 of 2022 Date of Institution : 05.04.2022 Date of Decision : 13.07.2022 The Estate Officer, Bathinda Development Authority (BDA), PUDA Complex, Bhagu Road, Bathinda.

……Appellant/Opposite Party Versus Vijay Pal Makkar S/o Sh.Lekh Raj Makkar, aged about 53 years R/o H.No.402, L.B. Enclave, Sector 49-A, Chandigarh.

…..Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top