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) 2597

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
AMARJEET SINGH BALI – Appellant
Versus
HOUSEFED PUNJAB – Respondent
SC/4/FA/215/2025



Petitioner Advocates:NEERAJ PAL SHARMA ,Respondent Advocate:

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION CHANDIGARH FIRST APPEAL NO. SC/4/FA/215/2025 (Against the Order dated 1st April 2025 in Complaint No. DC/44/CC/4/2022 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh district commission)

WITH SC/4/IA/46/2025 (CONDONATION OF DELAY)

AMARJEET SINGH BALI PRESENT ADDRESS - S/O SHRI JOGINDE RSINGH BALI, R/O H.NO. 125, SECTOR 46-A, CHANDIGARH UT-160047. , CHANDIGARHCHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

.......Appellant(s)

Versus HOUSEFED PUNJAB PRESENT ADDRESS - THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HEAD OFFICE SCO NO. 150-

151-152, SECTOR 34-A, CHANDIGARH U.T. -160022. , CHANDIGARHCHANDIGARH,CHANDIGARH.

.......Respondent(s)

BEFORE:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI , PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR. RAJESH KUMAR ARYA , MEMBER FOR THE APPELLANT: AMARJEET SINGH BALI DATED: 01/04/2026

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH Amarjeet Singh Bali, S/o Shri Joginder Singh Bali, Resident of House Number 125, Sector 46-A, Chandigarh UT-160 047.

…..Complainant Versus The Punjab State Federation of Co-Op. House Building Societies Limited. (Housefed Punjab) Through its Managing Director, Head Office: SCO No. 150-151-152, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh U.T. - 160 022.

…..Opposite party =================================================================

Appeal No. : 216 of 2025 Date of Institution : 02.07.2025 Date of Decision : 01.04.2026 Bharat Bhushan Rajdev S/o Shri Prehlad Bhagat Rajdev, Resident of House Number 1306, Sector 4, Panchkula 134 112, Haryana.

…..Complainant Versus The Punjab State Federation of Co-Op. House Building Societies Limited, (Housefed Punjab) Through its Managing Director, Head Office: SCO No. 150-151-152, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh U.T. - 160 022.

…..Opposite party =================================================================

Appeal No. : 217 of 2025 Date of Institution : 02.07.2025 Date of Decision : 01.04.2026 Inder Mohan, S/o Shri Jai Gopal, Resident of Ashok Vihar, Phirni Road, Fazilka 152 123, Punjab.

…..Complainant Versus The Punjab State Federation of Co-Op. House Building Societies Limited, (Housefed Punjab) Through its Managing Director, Head Office: SCO No. 150-151-152, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh U.T. - 160 022.

…..Opposite party =================================================================

Pawan Kumar Tuteja S/o Shri R.L. Tuteja, Resident of Flat No. 402, Block A-1, Blue Sky High Rise, Aakriti Ecocity, Near World Way International School, Bhopal - 462 026, Madhya Pradesh.

…..Complainant Versus The Punjab State Federation of Co-Op. House Building Societies Limited, (Housefed Punjab) Through its Managing Director, Head Office: SCO No. 150-151-152, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh U.T. - 160 022.

…..Opposite party =================================================================

Tripta Sood w/o Shri K.S. Sood, Resident of Flat No. J-504, Mona Greens II. Gazipur Road, Zirakpur 140

603, SAS Nagar, Mohali, Punjab …..Complainant Versus The Punjab State Federation of Co-Op. House Building Societies Limited, (Housefed Punjab) Through its Managing Director, Head Office: SCO No. 150-151-152, Sector 34-A, Chandigarh U.T. - 160 022.

…..Opposite party =================================================================

BEFORE: JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT MR.RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER Present:- Sh.N.P. Sharma, Advocates for the appellants.

Sh.Naginder Singh Vashist, Advocate for respondents.

PER JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT The complainants/appellants are hapless homebuyers, who have remained involved in litigation for several years, yet neither has the amount deposited with the respondent been refunded nor any effective relief has been granted. The complainants had invested their hard-earned money in the project of the opposite party with a legitimate expectation of timely possession of the respective flats/units at the agreed price; however, the respondent failed to deliver the same and continued to retain the funds. Salt was added to the miseries of the complainants, as the respondent ar

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