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

2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 2551

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M/s J.P.Infra Developers – Appellant
Versus
Harish Kumar Shetty – Respondent
SC/29/A/231/2021



Petitioner Advocates:Sarat Chandra Bijai ,Respondent Advocate: S.K.S

##PAGE1##

1

sc/29lAl2s1/2O2t

Date of Filing 08.03.2021

:

Date of Disposal 02. 03.2026

:

DISPUTES REDRESSAL COM MISSION,

PRINCIPAL BENCH

DATED, THIS THE 2"d DAY oF ARCH, o26

PRESENT

HON,BLE MT JUSTICE T G SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA:

PRESIDENT

HON,BLE MTs DIVYASHREE M: LADY MEMBER

sc/29/Al23L/2O2L

1. M/s l.P.S. Infra Developers',

A Registered Partnership Firm

having its office at-Door No.13-2-105,

Ground Floor, S.L.N. Complex,

G.H.S. Road, Mangaluru-575001,

South Kanara District,

Represented by its Managing Paftner

Mr.Jayaprakash S.

2. Mr Jayaprakash S

S/o Mr B Seethram

Managing Partner

Aged about 49 years

R/at 'Tejaswitha'

Monkey Stand Cross Road

Marnamikatta, Mangaluru

Dakshina Kannada District-575 002 Appellants

(By Mr Sarat Chandra Bijai, Advocate)

KSCDRC

##PAGE2##

2

sc Al23t

129 I 12021

-Versus-

1, Mr.Harish Kumar Shetty,

S/o Padmanabha Shetty,

Aged about 29 years,

R/o Apartment No.204,

2nd Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

2. Mrs.Anuradha Narasimha Karanth,

W/o Mr.P.Narasimha Kamath,

Aged about 69 years,

R/o Apartment No.311,

3'd Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575, South Kanara District-575 014

3. Mr. Vinod Kumar,

S/o Late Raghava,

Aged about 47 Years.

R/o Apartment No.112

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential APa rtments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

4. Mrs. Manjula Vani,

W/o Mr. Vinod Kumar,

Aged about 46 years,

R/o Apartment No.112

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

KSCDRC

##PAGE3##

sc 129 I Al23r l2O2t

5. Mr. Purushothama Karkera,

S/o Late Vamana Kundar,

Aged about 40 years,

R/o Apartment No.212,

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

6. Mr.Jayasheela N.Kotian,

S/o P.Narayana Salina,

Aged about 49 years,

R/o Apartment No.102,

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

7. Mrs.Nalini J.Kotian,

W/o Jayasheela N.Kotian,

Aged about 42years,

Apartment No.102,

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apaft ments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

8. Mr.Abhilash Kasaragod,

S/o Shashikanth Kumar K.

Aged about 30 years,

R/o Apartment No,108,

1't Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

KSCDRC

##PAGE4##

4

sc l29l Al237l2O2t

9. Mr. Karthik Raj,

S/o Late Vasudeva Karkera,

Aged about 29 years,

R/o Apartment No.412

4th Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014

10. Mrs.Divya V.Shriyan,

W/o Mr.Karthik Rai,

Aged about 23 years

R/o Apaftment No.412,

4th Floor, J.P.S. Chirag

Residential Apartments',

No.50 Iddya Village,

Surathkal, Mangaluru,

South Kanara District-575 014 Respondents

(By Mr Sarath Kumar Shetty, Advocate)

: ORAL ORDER :

PER: Mr JUSTICE T G SHMSHANKARE GOWDA:

PRESIDENT

This Appeal is filed U/S 4t of the Consumer

Protection Act, 2019 by Opposite Party No'1 and 2 (herein

after referred to as'the OPs'), challenging the Order dated

27.lt.2O2O passed in Consumer Complaint No'17/2018 by

the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission,

Mangaluru (in short'the District Commission').

KSCDRC

##PAGE5##

5

sc /29 I A1237 l2O2r

2. The Appellants were the OPs 1 & 2 and the

Respondents were the Complainants before the District

Commission. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the

parties shall be referred to as per their status before the

District Commission.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that; OPs are the

builders and Complainants are the buyers. Complainant

t

No. has purchased the Apartment bearing No.204;

Complainant No.2 has purchased the Apartment bearing

No.311; Complainant Nos. 3 and 4 have purchased the

Apartment bearing No.112 & 211; Complainant No.5 has

purchased the Apartment bearing No.212; Complainant

& 7

No.6 purchased the Apartment bearing No.102;

Complainant No.

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 Back to top