Haryana

StateCommission

CC/372/2017

HARI OM SHARMA ATTRI - Complainant(s)

Versus

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

ASHWANI BHARDWAJ

16 Mar 2021

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA   

                                                 

                                      Consumer Complaint No.372 of 2017

                                      Date of Institution: 07.06.2017

                                      Date of Decision: 16.03.2021

 

1.      Hari Om Sharma Attri son of Shri Sita Ram Sharma, District and Sessions Judge, CBI Court, Jaipur.

2.      Vandana wife of Hari Om Sharma Attri,

          Both residents of House No.JA-7, Nyaydeep, Gandhi Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)-202015.

…..Complainants

VERSUS

 

1.      DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., SCO 190-191-192, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh-UT, Pin-160009 through its Manager/Authorized Signatory/Officer-In-Charge/Director Sales & Marketing.

2.      DLF Homes Panchkula Pvt. Ltd., Regd. Office DLF Gateway Tower, Second Floor, DLF City, Phase-III, Gurgaon-122002, Haryana, India through its Manager/Authorized Signatory/Officer-In-Charge/Director Sales & Marketing.

….. Opposite Parties

 

CORAM:    Hon’ble Mr. Justice T.P.S. Mann, President.

                   Shri Harnam Singh Thakur, Judicial Member.                  

 

Present:-    Shri Sumit Sharma, counsel for the complainants.

                   Shri Shiv Kumar, counsel for the opposite parties.                 

 

                                                O R D E R

T.P.S. MANN, J. (ORAL)

          The complainants have filed the instant complaint under Section 12 read with Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for issuance of directions to the opposite parties to hand over the physical and legal possession of the Unit C-2/11 GF # 217, Panchkula Valley along with interest @ 18% per annum on the amount deposited to the complainants.

2.      Upon notice, the opposite parties have put in appearance and filed their written version.

3.      Both the parties have also led their respective evidence.

4.      Learned counsel for the complainants states that the matter between the parties stands amicably resolved and in these circumstances, the complainants want to withdraw the complaint.

5.      Learned counsel for the opposite parties states that he has no objection, if the complainants are permitted to withdraw the complaint.

6.      In view of the above, the complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn.

 

Announced 16.03.2021

(Harnam Singh Thakur)  Judicial Member

(T.P.S. Mann) President

DR