2026 Supreme(Online)(SCDRC) 2728
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
M/s Cannes Property Management Services P Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Manisha Bansal Badal and Others – Respondent
SC/3/A/94/2023
##PAGE1##
ADDITIONAL BENCH STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR 37-A, CHANDIGARH.
1) First Appeal No.94 of 2023 Date of institution : 14.02.2023 Reserved on : 24.03.2026 Date of decision : 02.04.2026
M/s Cannes Property Management Services P Ltd., SCO 3 & 4, Sector 110-111, Landran- Banur Road, TDI City, Phase-II, Mohali
160055.
….Appellant/Opposite party No.4 Versus
1. Manisha Bansal Badal Wife of Shri Suresh Chander Badal, Resident of House No.347, Sector 30, Chandigarh.
2. Suresh Chander Badal son of Sardar Singh resident of House No.347, Sector 30, Chandigarh.
….Respondent No.1 & 2/Complainants
3. M/s TDI Infratech Ltd. Regional Office, SCO 51-52, Sector 118, Chandigarh Kharar road (NH 21), TDI City, Daon, Mohali
Pb.160055.
4. M/s TDI Facilities and Maintenance Ltd., SCO 3 & 4, Sector
110-111, Landran-Banur Road, TDI City, Phase-II, Mohali
140307.
5. M/s Colliers Property Management Services P Ltd. TDI City Sector 110-111, Landran-Banur Road, Phase-II, Mohali
140307.(Deleted vide order dated 09.08.2023)
.….Respondents No.3 to 5/OPs No.1 to 3 AND
2) First Appeal No.112 of 2023 Date of institution : 20.02.2023 Reserved on : 24.03.2026 Date of decision : 02.04.2026
##PAGE2##2 FA No. 94 of 2023
1. M/s TDI Infratech Ltd. Regional Office, SCO 51-52, Sector 118, Chandigarh Kharar road (NH 21), TDI City, Daon, Mohali
Pb.160055.
2. M/s TDI Facilities and Maintenance Ltd., SCO 3 & 4, Sector
110-111, Landran-Banur Road, TDI City, Phase-II, Mohali
140307.
…..Appellants/Opposite party No.1 &2 Versus
1. Manisha Bansal Badal Wife of Shri Suresh Chander Badal, Resident of House No.347, Sector 30, Chandigarh.
2. Suresh Chander Badal son of Sardar Singh resident of House No.347, Sector 30, Chandigarh.
….Respondent No.1 & 2/Complainants
3. M/s Colliers Property Management Services P Ltd. TDI City Sector 110-111, Landran- Banur Road, Phase-II, Mohali
140307.
4. M/s Cannes Property Management Services P Ltd., SCO 3 & 4, Sector 110-111, Landran- Banur Road, TDI City, Phase-II,
Mohali 160055.
.….Respondent No.3 & 4/Opposite Party No.3 & 4
First Appeals against the order dated 02.01.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SAS
Nagar ( Mohali) in CC/302/2017
Quorum:-
Mr. H.P.S.Mahal, Presiding Judicial Member Mrs. Kiran Sibal, Member Present:- In (FA/94/2023)
For the appellant : Sh. Anuj Kohli, Advocate For respondent No.1 & 2 : Sh. Avichal Sharma, Advocate
For respondents No.3&4 : Sh. Puneet Tulli, Advocate For respondent No.5 : Deleted vide order dated 09.08.23
##PAGE3##3 FA No. 94 of 2023
In (FA/112/2023)
For the appellants : Sh. Puneet Tulli, Advocate For respondents No.1 & 2 : Sh. Avichal Sharma, Advocate
For respondent No.3 : Deleted vide order dated 09.08.23 For respondent No.4 : Sh. Anuj Kohli, Advocate
KIRAN SIBAL, MEMBER This order shall dispose of the above noted two First
Appeals preferred against the same order dated 02.01.2023 passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, SAS Nagar, Mohali (in short, “the District Commission”), wherein the District Commission accepted the complaint of the complainant while
granting the following relief:-
“In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and the order all the OPs to claim only the maintenance charges @ Rs.1/- per Sq. yard as per agreement Ex.C-3 executed between the CCs and OP No.1 & 2. It is also ordered that the OPs will withdraw the notices Ex.C-4 to Ex.C-7 and invite the CCs to execute fresh maintenance agreement in consonance with the original agreement dated 28.09.2011, which was executed between the CCs and OP No.1 and 2. All the OPs are jointly and severally burdened to pay a consolidated amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- to the CCs towards
mental agony, harassment and cost of litigation. ”
These both appeals bearing No.94 of 2023 and No.112 of 2023 have been filed by the appellants for setting aside the impugned order of the District Commission. The facts are taken from First Appeal No.94 of 2023 filed by the appell