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

CC/1617/2016 MR. SUDESH JAIN VS. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD. DOD: 19.10.2022

ALLOWED PAGE 1 OF 14

IN THE DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION

Date of institution: 29.12.2016

Date of hearing: 22.08.2022

Date of Decision: 19.10.2022

COMPLAINT CASE NO.- 1617/2016

IN THE MATTER OF

MR. SUDESH JAIN,

S/O MR. JHUNNI LAL JAIN,

R/O 55, B. D ESTATE, MALL ROAD,

TIMARPUR, NEW DELHI - 110054

(Through: Mr. Ravinder Yadav, Advocate)

…Complainant

VERSUS

M/S PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD.

HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT :

6TH FLOOR ARUNACHAL BULIDING

19, BARAKHAMBA ROAD, NEW DELHI-110001

CORPORATE OFFICE AT:

PARSVNATH METRO TOWER,

NEAR SHAHDARA METRO STATION,

SHAHDARA, DELHI

(Through: KNM & Partners, Law Offices)

…Opposite Party

CC/1617/2016 MR. SUDESH JAIN VS. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD. DOD: 19.10.2022

ALLOWED PAGE 2 OF 14

CORAM:

HON’BLE

JUSTICE

SANGITA

DHINGRA

SEHGAL

(PRESIDENT)

HON’BLE MS. PINKI, (JUDICIAL MEMBER)

Present:

None for the parties.

PER: HON’BLE JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL (PRESIDENT)

JUDGMENT

1.

The present complaint has been filed by the Complainant before

this commission alleging deficiency of service on the part of

Opposite Party and has prayed the following reliefs:

A. Direct opposite Party to refund entire amount of Rs.

11,00,000/- along with interest @ 24% p.a from the date

of respective payment till its realization to the

complainant;

B. Direct the opposite party to pay damages of Rs

10,00,000/ to Complainants on account of losses, mental

agony, pain, suffering and harassment suffered due to

deficiency in service and unfair and deceptive trade

practice of the opposite party.

C. Impose exemplary costs upon the opposite party for the

cheating, misappropriation and delay in delivering

possession.

D. Award complainants Rs. 1,00,000/- as cost of this

litigation, And;

E. Pass any other or further orders/direction as this

Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and

circumstances of the present case.”

2.

Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint

are that the complainant purchased the plot in question from Mr.

CC/1617/2016 MR. SUDESH JAIN VS. PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD. DOD: 19.10.2022

ALLOWED PAGE 3 OF 14

Sunil Wadhwani (original allottee) in the year 2006. Thereafter,

the name of the Complainant was endorsed in the records of the

Opposite Party and the Opposite Party also confirmed the

substitution of Complainant’s name in place of original allottee

vide letter dated 05.07.2006. The plot of 400 sq. yds. was booked

in the project ‘Parsvnath City’ at Sonepat, Haryana of the Opposite

Party. An amount of Rs. 11,00,000/- was paid to the Opposite

Party for the said plot. The Clause (c) of the Advance Registration

Form clearly states that in the event the residential plot is allotted

after 9 months, simple interest @ 10% per annum shall be paid to

the buyer for the period delayed beyond 9 months on the amount

paid by the buyer as advance till such time the allottee are allotted

a residential plot or adjusted against the price of the plot to be

allotted to the buyer. However, till date neither the allotment nor

the possession of the said plot has been given by the Opposite

Party. The Complainant sent various communications to the

Opposite Party to know about the progress of the allotment of plot

but no satisfactory response was given by the Opposite Party.

3.

The counsel for the Complainant further submitted that the

Opposite Party do not have the necessary sanction and lic

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top