AMANDEEP AGGARWAL vs SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2203 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 12/06/2017 in Complaint No. 12/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. AMANDEEP AGGARWAL
R/O. NEAR SANTOSHI MATA MANDIR, OLD MANDI STREET.
SANGRUR.
PUNJAB.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. R/O. TEHSIL AND DISTRICT-SANGRUR.
SANGRUR
PUNJAB
2. CHAIRMAN, SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST.
SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT-SANGRUR.
SANGRUR
PUNJAB.

...........Respondent(s)


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2204 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 27/07/2017 in Complaint No. 141/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. SANDEEP KUMAR SALUJA
S/O. SH. SURINDER KUMAR SALUJA GALI NO.9, PUNIA COLONY.
SANGRUR
PUNJAB.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
SANGRUR
PUNJAB
2. CHAIRMAN, SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST.
SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.
PUNJAB

...........Respondent(s)


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2205 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 27/07/2017 in Complaint No. 142/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. ROOPAM JAIN
S/O. SH. SURINDER KUMAR JAIN. R/O. GURUDWARA SINGH SBHA STREET, HOUSE NO.300, DHURI GATE SANGRUR.
PUNJAB

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. SANGRUR DEVELOPMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.
PUNJAB.
2. CHAIRMAN, SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST.
SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SANGRUR.
SAGRUR.
PUNJAB

...........Respondent(s)


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2220 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 27/07/2017 in Complaint No. 141/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.
2. THE CHAIRMAN, SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST.
SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. SANDEEP KUMAR SALUJA
GALI NO.9, PUNIA COLONY, SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.

...........Respondent(s)


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2221 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 27/07/2017 in Complaint No. 142/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER. SANGRUR, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT-SANGRUR.
SANGRUR
2. THE CHAIRMAN.
SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST, SANGRUR.
SANGRUR.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. ROOPAM JAIN
R/O. GURUDWARA SINGH SABHA STREET, HOUSE NO.300, DHURI GATE.
SANGRUR.

...........Respondent(s)


FIRST APPEAL NO. 2437 OF 2017

(Against the Order dated 12/06/2017 in Complaint No. 12/2016 of the State Commission Punjab)

1. SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST & ANR.
THROUGH ITS EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
SANGRUR.
2. THE CHAIRMAN.
SANGRUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST.
SANGRUR.

...........Appellant(s)

Versus

1. AMANDEEP AGGARWAL
S/O. SH. R.D. AGGARWAL. R/O. NEAR SANTOSHI MATA MANDIR, OLD MANDI STREET.
SANGRUR.

...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
	HON'BLE MR. C. VISWANATH,PRESIDING MEMBER
	HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA,MEMBER

For the Appellant :

Mr. Vineet Bhagat, Advocate

For the Respondent :

Mr. Prem Kumar, Advocate

Dated : 05 Aug 2022

ORDER

1. As the dispute involved in aforesaid six First Appeals is same, they are disposed of by a common order.

2. First Appeal No.2203/2017 has been filed by the Appellant/Complainant against the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh dated 12.06.2017 in CC/12/2016. First Appeals Nos.2204/2017 & 2205/2017 have been filed by the Appellants/Complainants against the order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short “State Commission”) dated 27.07.2017 in CC/141/2016 and CC/142/2016. Cross Appeals Nos.2220/2017, 2437/2017 and 2221/2017 have been filed by the Respondents/Opposite Parties.

3. The case of the Appellants/Complainants is that the Opposite Party issued an advertisement inviting applications for allotment of flats. The booking commenced from 12.05.2011. The Complainants were allotted different flats. The Opposite Parties failed to handover possession within the stipulated time, in spite of payments made by

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Login now and unlock premium legal research