We have perused the material available on record including the written arguments filed on behalf of the complainant and have heard the arguments of the Opposite Party.Ĩ. Both the parties filed their Evidence by way of Affidavit in order to prove their averments on record.ħ. Pressing the aforesaid preliminary objections, the counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party prayed that the complaint should be dismissed.Ħ. 4,28,148/- but the complainant failed to take the possession of the said flat. The counsel for the Opposite Party submitted that the possession of the said flat was offered to the complainant vide letter dated with a demand of Rs. The counsel on behalf of the Opposite Party submitted that the complainant is not “Consumer” as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as the complainant had booked various flats in the same project and the present complaint is barred by limitation as per section 24A of the Consumer protection Act, 1986.ĥ. The Opposite Party has contested the present case and has raised some preliminary objections as to the maintainability of the complaint case.
Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of opposite party, the complainant has approached this commission.Ĥ. The complainant also sent a legal notice dated to the Opposite Party asking for refund but was of no avail.ģ. 23,79,257/- to the Opposite Party as and when demanded by him. The complainant over the time had paid a sum of Rs. However, till date the possession of the said apartment has not been handed over by the opposite party to the complainant. As per Article 5(A)(i) of the apartment buyer agreement sent by opposite party vide email dated, the opposite party had to complete the construction of the said apartment within 36 months from the date of commencement of construction of particular tower in which apartment is located. E-1303 and the payments made against the other flats stood credited against apartment E-1303. Vide letter dated, all these provisional allotments of flats are consolidated into one apartment i.e. B-601, D-201 & E-1303 in the project of the opposite party “M2K Country Heights” situated at Dharuhera, Haryana. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of the present complaint are that the complainant along with her brother and relative booked three flats bearing no. d) Pass any further order/orders which this Hon’ble Forum may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5,00,000/- towards litigation expenses in favour of the complainant and against the opposite party. 15,00,000/- as damages/compensation to the complainant for providing deficient services and for causing mental agony, pain and suffering caused to the complainant. 23,79,257/- (Twenty three lakhs seventy nine thousand two hundred and fifty seven) along with interest 24% per annum/Īs per the OP agreement (or as per the RBI guidelines) from the date of receipt till its realization to the complainant. (hereinafter referred to as ‘opposite party’) and has prayed the following reliefs:-Ī) Direct the opposite party to refund the paid amount of Rs.
Usha Rani (hereinafter referred to as ‘complainant’) against M/s M2K Infrastructure Pvt. The present complaint being filed under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 by Ms.
0 kommentar(er)
