company-name-logo

Development Authority

Latest Judgments

Total 3630 Consumer Court Cases Against Development Authority.

NCDRC

KRISHAN LAL V/S DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Delhi Development Authority   Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. PRADUMAN KUMAR AGGARWAL

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI FIRST APPEAL NO. 486 OF 2006(Against the Order dated null in Complaint No. of the State Commission Delhi)1. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY-...........Appellant(s)Versus1. KRISHAN LALR/O. 90/88, Ground Floor,Malviya NagarNew De...

Case Number: 486

|

Date of Filing: 12-09-2006

|

Date of Upload: 30-09-2011

NCDRC

RAVINDER PAL SINGH BAINS V/S PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.

Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. PRAKASH KUMAR SINGH

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 667 OF 2011(Against the Order dated 01/12/2010 in Appeal No. 1604/2004 of the State Commission Chandigarh)1. PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ANR.PUDA Bhawan, Sector 62MohaliPunjab2. THE...

Case Number: 667

|

Date of Filing: 25-02-2011

|

Date of Upload: 16-09-2011

NCDRC

S.B. SINGH V/S GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Development Authority   Ghaziabad Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MS. REENA SINGH

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 3932 OF 2010(Against the Order dated 22/02/2010 in Appeal No. 1753/1996 of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh)1. GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYThrough its Secretary, Vikash Path, Distt. City Ghaziabad...

Case Number: 3932

|

Date of Filing: 21-10-2010

|

Date of Upload: 15-09-2011

NCDRC

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANR. V/S M/S. DAULAT RAM HOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED

Development Authority   Hotel   Haryana Urban Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. NEERAJ SHARMA

Respondant Advocate -

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI APPEAL NO. 767 OF 2006(Against the Order dated 01/11/2006 in Complaint No. 54/2006 of the State Commission Chandigarh)1. M/S. DAULAT RAM HOTEL PRIVATE LIMITEDMANAGING DIRECTOR, SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR 1644, URBAN ESTATE - II HIS...

Case Number: 767

|

Date of Filing: 18-12-2006

|

Date of Upload: 23-09-2011

NCDRC

KUSUM LATA VAISHAT V/S HIMACHAL PRADESH HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. Y. PRABHAKAR RAO

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 790 OF 2009(Against the Order dated 19/11/2008 in Appeal No. 108/2007 of the State Commission Himachal Pradesh)1. HIMACHAL PRADESH HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY...........Petitioner(s)Versus1. ...

Case Number: 790

|

Date of Filing: 16-03-2009

|

Date of Upload: 15-09-2011

NCDRC

V P NARAYANAN V/S DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Delhi Development Authority   Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate GIRIJA WADHWA

Respondant Advocate -

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI APPEAL NO. 319 OF 2006(Against the Order dated 21/02/2006 in Complaint No. 137/1994 of the State Commission Delhi)1. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYVIKAS SADAN, INA NEW DELHI -...........Appellant(s)Versus1. V P NARAYANANFLAT N...

Case Number: 319

|

Date of Filing: 05-07-2006

|

Date of Upload: 07-09-2011

NCDRC

RAM KUMAR GUPTA V/S LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Development Authority   Lucknow Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. SHAKIL AHMAD SYED

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 2987 OF 2009(Against the Order dated 23/04/2009 in Appeal No. 1465/2005 of the State Commission Uttar Pradesh)1. LUCKNOW DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYThrough Its Secretary . 6, Jagdish Chand Bose. Marg. Luckno...

Case Number: 2987

|

Date of Filing: 11-08-2009

|

Date of Upload: 07-09-2011

NCDRC

AMRIT BHATIA V/S HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

Development Authority   Haryana Urban Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate MR. AJAY PAL, ADV.

Respondant Advocate -

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 2491 OF 2007(Against the Order dated 20/10/2006 in Appeal No. 2724/2003 of the State Commission Haryana)1. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY PANCHKULA THROUGH ITS CHIEF THROUGH ADMINISTRATOR, SECTOR-...

Case Number: 2491

|

Date of Filing: 19-07-2007

|

Date of Upload: 05-09-2011

NCDRC

HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY & ORS. V/S DR. ANAND PRAKASH MITTAL

Development Authority   Haryana Urban Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate NIRAJ SINGH

Respondant Advocate

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 2505 OF 2011(Against the Order dated 04/03/2011 in Appeal No. 2070/2005 of the State Commission Haryana)1. DR. ANAND PRAKASH MITTALS/o Shri P.L Mittal, 334 Loha mandi, TehsilHissarHaryana...........Pet...

Case Number: 2505

|

Date of Filing: 26-07-2011

|

Date of Upload: 05-09-2011

NCDRC

MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY V/S K.C.NAGARAJU AND ANR.

Development Authority   Mysore Urban Development Authority  

Court Name: NCDRC

Appelant Advocate P.R.RAMASESH

Respondant Advocate MR. M.A. CHINNASAMY,

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHI REVISION PETITION NO. 234 OF 2007(Against the Order dated 23/08/2006 in Appeal No. 1824/2006 of the State Commission Karnataka)1. K.C.NAGARAJU AND ANR.S/O. SHRI , CHANNEEGOWDA BOTH ARE RESIDENTS , OF NO , 305. 2/4TH MAIN R...

Case Number: 234

|

Date of Filing: 22-01-2007

|

Date of Upload: 02-09-2011

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.

Common FAQ

Question : Am I eligible to file case against Development Authority in Consumer Forum?

Answer : If you have purchased a product or avails any service, either for your personal use or to earn your livelihood by means of self-employment.

Question : When I can fill a complaint against Development Authority ?

Answer : A complaint may be made against Development Authority under the following circumstances:
1 : Loss or damage is caused to the consumer due to unfair or restrictive trade practice.
2 : the article purchased by you is defective.
3 : the services availed of by you suffer from any deficiency.
4 : charged more then MRP
5 : Goods or services, which will be hazardous to life and safety, when used, are being offered for sale to the public.

Question : Is there any exemption from payment of Court Fee?

Answer : The complainants who are Below the Poverty Line shall be entitled for the exemption of payment of fee for complaints upto rupees one lakh on production of an attested copy of the Antyodaya Anna Yojana card.

Question : What are the Reliefs available to Consumers?

Answer : The reliefs available are :
1 : Removal of defects from the goods
2 : Replacement of the goods
3 : Refund of the price paid.
4 : Removal of defects or deficiencies in the services
5 : Award of compensation for the loss or injury suffered;
6 : Discontinue and not to repeat unfair trade practice or restrictive trade practice;
7 : To withdraw hazardous goods from being offered for sale;
8 : To cease manufacture of hazardous goods and desist from offering services which are hazardous in nature;
9 : If the loss or injury has been suffered by a large number of consumers who are not identifiable conveniently, to pay such sum (not less than 5% of the value of such defective goods or services provided) which shall be determined by the forum;
10 : To issue corrective advertisement to neutralize the effect of misleading advertisement;
11 : To provide adequate costs to parties.