IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Date of Institution:15.01.2024 Date of hearing:29.07.2025 Date of Decision: 22.09.2025 APPEAL EXECUTION NO.01/2024 IN THE MATTER OF

1. GEETANJALI KHOSLA B-98, GREATER KAILASH-I, NEW DELHI -110048.

2. SHREEANKA KAKKAR, B-100, GREATER KAILASH-I, NEW DELHI -110048.

…Appellant (Through: Mr. Arun Khosla, Advocate)

VERSUS

1. ENERTAINMENT CITY LTD.

METRO WALK, SECTOR -10, NEAR RITHALA METRO STATION, DELHI -110085.

2. GIAN VIJESHWAR 3. MONI VIJESHWAR

4. ROBIN VIJESHWAR

5. ASHOK KUMAR

6. ASHOK KUMAR YADAV

7. VINOD HINGORANI 8. SONI SRIVASTAVA

9. ATUL KUMAR MITTAL

10. NEETU YADAV 11. GAURAV PURI

12. SWAPNEEL RAJENDRA DESAI

13. RANA RAJESH GANGAHAR ALL DIRECTORS ENERTAINMENT CITY LTD.

METRO WALK, SECTOR -10, NEAR RITHALA METRO STATION, DELHI -110085.

…Respondent No.1,2,5,6,7,9, 10 and 13 (Through: Ms. Shivani Chawla, Advocate)

…Respondent No.3, 4, 8 and 12 (Through: None)

…Respondent No.11 (Through: Mr. Abhay Singh and Ankita Agarwal, Advocates)

CORAM:

HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS PINKI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, PRESIDENT

JUDGMENT

1. Present appeal has been filed by the Appellants/Complainant under Section 73 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, challenging the order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the District Commission-VII in EA No.26/2022, whereby the execution application filed by the Appellants has been adjourned sine-die quo Respondents No.1 and the dismissing the same qua Respondents No.2 to 13.

2. The order dated 22.12.2023 passed by District Commission reads as under:

“1. The Complainant have filed an application under section 27 of Consumer Protection Act with the averments that the case titled as Ms. Geetanjali Khosla and Ors. Vs Entertainment City Ltd. was pending disposal in this Commission and said compliant was referred to Delhi Government Mediation and Conciliation Center where the complaint was settled, which is clear from the settlement dated 16.05.2017. The parties have agreed to bound by the settlement so the complaint was withdrawn on the basis of settlement on 10.07.2017. The OPs have not complied with the settlement. A sum of Rs.4638144/- besides the interest on various monthly installment of Rs.165648 from the date of the filing with interest @12% p.a. is due. Hence, this application.

2. The OPs have filed an application to adjourn the present application sine die with the averments that OP No.1 is joint venture of Unitech Holdings Ltd., a wholly owned subsidy of Unitech Ltd. International amusement Ltd. with UHL holding of 2. 41.95% of the equity and IAL holding of 53.15% of equity. There are numerous litigations against Unitech Ltd. as well as against its entities. Hon’ble Apex Court directed the union Government to appoint independent management for Unitech Ltd. upon which Government proposed the Constitution of new Board of Directors which was approved by Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil appeal No.10856/2016 titled as Bhupender Singh vs Unitech Ltd. vide order dated 20.01.2020. The erstwhile management of Unitech Ltd. was superseded. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India appointed independent Board of Directors vide orders dated 21.01.2020, 22.01.2020 and 03.02.2020. The matters pertaining to affairs of Unitech Ltd. and its entities have been under consideration of Hon’ble Apex Court. The Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 20.01.2020 has directed that there shall be moratorium in cases of Unitech Group. The Hon’ble Apex Court vide order dated 24.03.2021 held that new board shall be responsible for the management and control of unitech group. The order dated 20.01.2020 is applicable to all group entities of Unitech Ltd. The management is authorized to appoint and remove Directors/Trustees of subsidiaries and trust etc. The Hon’’ble Apex Court vide order dated 24.03.2021 has extended the benefit of moratorium on all the affiliates, trust, subsidiary of Unitech Ltd. including the OP. The Commission ma