Chandigarh

StateCommission

FA/348/2013

M/s DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt.Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Bharminder Singh Mann - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Avinit Awasthi, Adv. for the appellants

23 Aug 2013

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. FA/348/2013
(Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. of District )
 
1. M/s DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt.Ltd.
Gurgaon
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. Bharminder Singh Mann
S/o Sh. Sadhu Singh Mann, R/o House No. 872, Sector-2, Panchkula
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER PRESIDENT
 HON'ABLE MR. DEV RAJ MEMBER
 
PRESENT:Sh. Avinit Awasthi, Adv. for the appellants, Advocate for the Appellant 1
 
ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

U.T.,CHANDIGARH

                                                         

First Appeal No.

:

348 of 2013

Date of Institution

:

12.08.2013

Date of Decision

 

23.08.2013

 

1]     M/s DLF Home Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., Regd. Office 12th Floor, DLF Gateway Tower, DLF City, Phase-III, NH-8, Gurgaon 122002, Haryana, through its Managing Director.

 

2]   DLFCityChandigarh 

……Appellants/Opposite Parties.

Versus

Bharminder Singh Mann son of Sh.Sadhu Singh Mann, R/o H.No.872, Sector 2, Panchkula.

     Appeal under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

 

BEFORE:  

               DEV RAJ, MEMBER.

               

Argued by:

 

PER DEV RAJ, MEMBER.

      

“11]       

 

      

 

2.                  complainant stopped the payment of the said cheque of Rs.19,24,350/-, and the same was dishonoured on presentation by the Opposite Parties. It was further stated that since no work was going on at the site and total amount paid by the complainant was not being accounted for, he sought refund of his deposited amount of Rs.10.00 Lacs, but to no effect.

3.          

4.              

5.           

6.   

7.    

8.   

9.    

10.    

11.         

12.        

13.           Act is made, which reads as under ;

“3.Act not in derogation of any other law.—

The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force.”

 

14.            Similar principle of law, was laid down, in SCC385 . In this view of the matter, the submission of the Counsel for the appellants/Opposite Parties, being devoid of merit, must fail, and 

15.        

“Subject to other terms of this Application and the Agreement including but not limited timely payment of the Total Price and other amounts, charges and dues as mentioned in the Application/Agreement, the Company shall endeavor to complete the construction of the Said Independent Floor within Twenty Four (24) months from the date of execution of the Agreement by the Company and thereafter the Company shall offer the possession of the Said Independent Floor to the Applicant along with the execution of the Conveyance Deed. Any delay by the Applicant in taking the possession would attract charges @Rs.10/- per sq. ft. (Rs.107.64/- per sq. mtr.) per month of the saleable area of the Said Independent Floor for any delay of one month or any part thereof. Subject to the terms and conditions of the Agreement, in case of delay by the Company in completion of the construction of the Said Independent Floor the Company shall pay compensation @10/- per sq. ft. (Rs.107.64/- per sq. mtr.) per month of the saleable area of the Said Independent Floor to the Applicant, which both parties agree in a fair, just and equitable and reasonable estimate of the damages that the Applicant is not in breach of any of the terms of this Application/Agreement. The adjustment of such compensation shall be done at the time of execution of conveyance deed.”

16.           

17.         ,  

 

18.        

19.        

20. No other point, was urged, by the Counsel for the appellants/Opposite Parties.

21.        

22.        

23.        

24.        

Pronounced.

23rd

[JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.)]

PRESIDENT

 

 

[DEV RAJ]

MEMBER

Ad


 

STATE COMMISSION

(First Appeal No.348 of 2013)

 

Argued by: 

 

Dated the 23rd

 

ORDER

 

             

2.           

3.           

4.           

5.           

6.           

 

 

(DEV RAJ)

MEMBER

(JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER (RETD.))

PRESIDENT

 

 

Ad

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER]
PRESIDENT
 
[HON'ABLE MR. DEV RAJ]
MEMBER

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.