STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION U.T., CHANDIGARH [ADDITIONAL BENCH]

Complaint No. : 51/2025 Date of Institution : 28.05.2025 Date of Decision : 24.03.2026 RIYA BANSAL, aged 29 years, wife of Sh. Dishant Jindal, Resident of House No.1471, First Floor, Deep Complex, Hallomajra, Chandigarh UT - 160002 …Complainant Versus

1] AKASH HOMES PREMIUM PLUS, through its Partner/Proprietor/

Promoter/Developer, Mr. Raman Kumar S/o Sh. Madan Lal, Resident of House No.70, Sector 21, Panchkula, Haryana – 134117

2] AKASH HOMES PREMIUM PLUS, through its Partner/Proprietor/

Promoter/Developer, Mr. Puneet Garg, Resident of House No.70, Sector 21, Panchkula, Haryana – 134117

3] The Sub Registrar/Joint Sub Registrar, SRO Zirakpur, Sub-Tehsil Zirakpur, office of Municipal Corporation, Opposite Police Station, Zirakpur, Punjab - 140603 …Opposite parties ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Complaint No. : 52/2025 Date of Institution : 28.05.2025 Date of Decision : 24.03.2026 NANDITA BANSAL, aged 29 years, wife of Sh. Vishal Jindal, Resident of House No.1471, 2nd Floor, Deep Complex, Hallomajra, Chandigarh UT -

160002 …Complainant Versus

1] AKASH HOMES PREMIUM PLUS, through its Partner/Proprietor/

Promoter/Developer, Mr. Raman Kumar S/o Sh. Madan Lal, Resident of House No.70, Sector 21, Panchkula, Haryana – 134117

2] AKASH HOMES PREMIUM PLUS, through its Partner/Proprietor/

Promoter/Developer, Mr. Puneet Garg, Resident of House No.70, Sector 21, Panchkula, Haryana – 134117

3] The Sub Registrar/Joint Sub Registrar, SRO Zirakpur, Sub-Tehsil Zirakpur, office of Municipal Corporation, Opposite Police Station, Zirakpur, Punjab - 140603 …Opposite parties BEFORE: MRS. PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER SH. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER ARGUED BY :-

Sh. Rajesh Verma, Advocate for the complainant Sh. Sandeep Bhardwaj, Advocate for opposites parties No.1 & 2 Opposite party No.3 exparte vide order dated 12.09.2025 PER PADMA PANDEY, PRESIDING MEMBER The above captioned complaints bearing No.51 of 2025 and 52 of 2025 have been filed by the respective complainants under the provisions of Section 47(1)(a)(ii) read with Section 49(2) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 alleging the terms and conditions of the sale deed to be one-sided and unfair contract.

2] Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these complaints, as such, the same are being disposed by passing this common order. To do so, the facts are being culled from the file of consumer complaint no.51 of 2025 titled ‘Riya Bansal Versus Akash Homes Premium Plus and others’.

Brief facts: (CC/51/2025)

3] The complainant, namely, Riya Bansal has alleged that opposite parties no.1 and 2 are joint owners of project Namely ‘Akash Homes Premium Plus’ situated at Akash Homes, Village Nabha MC and Sub Tehsil Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar, Mohali and they launched a project jointly by the name of ‘Akash Homes Premium Plus’. The project was advertised as RERA approved project. The complainant agreed to purchase one residential flat with opposite party no.1 and entered into agreement to sell and made payments to opposite parties no.1 and 2. The complainant also availed the loan facility from ICICI Bank for making payment of the flat. The complainant then demanded Occupancy and Completion Certificate from opposite parties no.1 and 2 which was promised to be provided at the time of registration of Sale Deed. The Sale Deed was executed before the Registering Authority on 26.12.2024 (Annexure C-5).

4] It has further been alleged that after the execution of Sale Deed, the complainant approached the opposite parties no.1 and 2 to provide the bills of the items/fixtures installed by them in the flat in order to change or seek warranty of the same in case door locks, chimney, bathroom fittings, cupboards, concealed lights etc. stopped working. When the digital lock stopped working, the complainant approached opposite parties no.1 and 2 for supply of Occupancy/Completion Cer