Haryana

Panchkula

EA/3/2017

MRS.ANURADHA GUPTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

ABHINEET TANEJA

03 Mar 2022

ORDER

 

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PANCHKULA.  

                                      

Execution Application No	:	03 of 2017
Date of Institution	:	04.01.2017
Date of Decision	:	03.03.2022

 

1.       Mrs. Anuradha Gupta W/o Lalit Gupta, R/o # 652, Sector-7,   Panchkula.

2.       Lalit Gupta S/o Sh. J.R. Gupta, R/o # 652, Sector-7, Panchkula.                                                                                    …….Complainants/Decree Holders

Versus

DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., SCO No. 190-193, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh through its authorised Signatory Rtd. Brig. Mohinder Singh.

…….Opposite Party/Judgment Debtor

Execution Application under 71 Consumer Protection Act, 2019

as amended upto date

Before:        Shri Satpal, President.

Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini, Member.

Dr. Sushma Garg, Member

                  

Present:       Complainant No. 2 in person alongwith Ms. Sonia Saini, Advocate.      

     Shri Kunal Dawar, Advocate, and Ms. Tanika,  Advocate, Counsels                   for the JD/OP.     

 

                  

                   Today the case is fixed for amicable settlement and in this regard, both the parties, by making their respective statements, have stated that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties.

                   The statement made by Ld. Counsel for the JD/OP, is reproduced as under:-

                   “Stated that the matter has been settled amicably between the parties. In view of the settlement, the JD had already handed over to the DH/Complainant, the demand draft bearing no. 526560 dated 02.03.2022 and another demand draft bearing no. 526561 dated 02.03.2022, both amounting to Rs. 3 Lacs each i.e. total Rs. 6 Lacs, in lieu of full and final satisfaction of the claim, and now, nothing survives therein. Therefore, it is requested that the present execution application may be dismissed in view of the settlement between the parties”.

                   On the other hand, the statement made by the DH/Complainant No. 2, is reproduced as under:-

                        “Stated that I have gone through the statement made by the Ld. Counsel for the JD/OP today and agree with the same. I, on my behalf as well as on behalf of the Complainant No. 1, being duly authorized, have received the demand draft bearing no. 526560 dated 02.03.2022 and another demand draft bearing no. 526561 dated 02.03.2022, both amounting to Rs. 3 Lacs each i.e. total Rs. 6 Lacs, in lieu of full and final satisfaction of the claim, and now, nothing is due against the JD/OP. Therefore, I, on my behalf as well as on behalf of the Complainant No. 1, being duly authorized, withdraw the present execution application, being fully satisfied.”

          Heard. In view of the statement made by both the parties, the present execution application is hereby dismissed as withdrawn, being fully satisfied.

                   A copy of this order be sent to the parties, free of costs and File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

 

Dt.              (Dr.Sushma Garg)                   (Dr. Pawan Kumar Saini)                   (Satpal)

03.03.2022   Member                                 Member                                                  President