NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA, PRESIDING MEMBER, MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA, MEMBER
ROHIT VERMA & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
SUPERTECH LIMITED & ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delay in possession without valid justification. (Para 2 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. opposite parties' force majeure claims lack evidence. (Para 7 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. entitlement to a refund based on non-delivery of possession. (Para 14 , 15) |
PER MR SUBHASH CHANDRA, MEMBER
The present Consumer Complaint has been filed under Section 21 read with Section 12 (1) (a) of the Consumer Protection Act , 1986 by Complainants against Opposite Parties i.e., Supertech Limited and Sarv Realtors Private Realtors, in relation to the Project “Supertech Hues” situated at Sector 68, Gurgaon, Haryana.
2. The facts leading upto the present Complaint are that the Complainants had booked a Unit in the project “Supertech Hues” situated at Sector 68, Gurgaon, Haryana which was being developed by Opposite Party No. 1. On 13.10.2013, the Complainants had paid a booking amount of Rs.6,00,000/-. On 23.09.2014, OP No. 1 executed the Buyer Developer Agreement and allotted a Unit bearing No. 0103 to the Complainants. As per clause 24 of the Agreement, possession of the Unit was to be delivered to the Complainants in 42 months, i.e. by April 2017 with an additional grace period of 6 months, i.e. latest by October
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.