Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Deepa Sharma, CJ, C. Viswanath, M
Jatinder Kaur – Appellant
Versus
Omaxe Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint details including booking and payment. (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. contract clauses regarding delivery and compensation. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. allegations of duress and contract terms. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. arguments regarding consumer status and maintainability. (Para 7 , 9 , 12) |
| 5. claim of deficiency in service. (Para 8) |
| 6. court's finding on delay in possession. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 7. delayed possession qualifies for a refund. (Para 14) |
1. According to the Complaint, on 27.02.2008, the Complainant booked a Flat measuring 4,150 sq./ft. under down payment plan costing (BSP) Rs. 1,18,27,500/- in “Omaxe Royal Residence –Royal Retreat” in Pakhowal Road, Ludhiana (Punjab) by paying Rs.9,12,000/- and Rs.2,28,000/- vide receipt No. 296231 dated 28.02.2008 and No.300227 dated 26.03.2008. Thereafter, the Complainant paid upto 95% of the BSP totalling to Rs.1,04,99,512/- as per the payment plan of the Opposite Party, including 50% of other miscellaneous charges by the due date of 23rd May 2008 for the subject Flat. This required 3 or 4 visits to the site and the Opposite Party being fully paid, allotted Flat no. 301 at the 3rd floor of the Tower called Royal Retreat-2. On 21.03.2008,
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
