Andhra Pradesh

StateCommission

FA/822/2011

M/s Crescent Real Estate and Developers Rep. by its sole proprietor, Mr.V.Khader Basha S/o Kareem Saheb - Complainant(s)

Versus

M.Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy S/o Ramachandra REddy, aged about 59 yrs., Occ: Rtd., D.J. - Opp.Party(s)

09 Oct 2012

ORDER

 
First Appeal No. FA/822/2011
(Arisen out of Order Dated null in Case No. CC/224/2009 of District Hyderabad-II)
 
1. M/s Crescent Real Estate and Developers Rep. by its sole proprietor, Mr.V.Khader Basha S/o Kareem Saheb
R/o 102, Paramount Gardens, A.C. Crreards, Hyderabad
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. M.Vijaya Bhaskara Reddy S/o Ramachandra REddy, aged about 59 yrs., Occ: Rtd., D.J.
R/o flat No. 401, Aditya Castle, Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HONABLE MRS. M.SHREESHA PRESIDING MEMBER
 
PRESENT:
 
ORDER

BEFORE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION: AT HYDERABAD

 

F.A.No. 822 OF 2011 AGAINST C.C.NO.224 OF 2009 DISTRICT CONSUMER FORUM –II HYDERABAD

 

Between

 

M/s Crescent Real Estates & Developers
rep. by its Sole Proprietor

 

Appellant/opposite party No.1

       

 

1.           

                                                       2.                  

 

3.           rd                                                                                                      

 

Counsel for the Appellant             Counsel for the Respondents QUORUM:

                           

                                                                              

 

               

                       

 

                

1.     `4`25,000/- towards costs.

2.    `4th  

3.     

4.            st`2 st 

5.             

6.             

7.     st

8.               

9.    

 

10.   `17`4 

11.    

 

       Terms and Conditions:

           

           

           

           

 

           

           

           

           

           

 

           

           

b)        

c)        

d)        

           

 

12.    `4   Admittedly, the first respondent had not paid the balance sale consideration as required by the terms of brochure or application form.

13.    `4 Admittedly, the second respondent and the third respondents are the agents of the appellant-company presumably working in the course of their employment as per the instructions of the appellant-company for propagating its business.  

14.      

15.              

16.   

       

(r)"unfair trade practice" means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provision of any service, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice including any of the following practices, namely;—

(1)  

(

(ii) 

(iii) 

(iv)

(

(vi)

(vii)

      Provided that where a(viii

(

(ii)  

(ix) 

(x) 

Explanation.For the purposes of clause (1), a statement that is— 

(a) expressed

(b)  expressed on anything attached to, inserted in, or accompanying, an article offered or displayed for sale, or on anything on which the article is mounted for display or sale; or

(c)  contained in or on anything that is sold, sent, delivered, transmit­ted or in any other manner whatsoever made available to a member of the public,  

shall be deemed to be a statement made to the public by, and only by, the person who had caused the statement to be so expressed, made or contained; 

(2) permits the publication of any advertisement whether in any news­paper or otherwise, for the sale or supply at a bargain price, of goods or services that are not intended to be offered for sale or supply at the bargain price, or for a period that is, and in quantities that are, reasonable, having regard to the nature of the market in which the business is carried on, the nature and size of business, and the nature of the advertisement.

Explanation .For the purpose of clause (2), "bargaining price" means—

(a)  a price that is stated in any advertisement to be a bargain price, by reference to an ordinary price or otherwise, or

(b)  a price that a person who reads, hears or sees the advertisement, would reasonably understand to be a bargain price having regard to the prices at which the product advertised or like products are ordinarily sold; 

(3)  (a)  the offering of gifts, prizes or other items with the intention of not providing them as offered or creating impression that something is being given or offered free of charge when it is fully or partly covered by the amount charged in the transaction as a whole;

(b)  the conduct of any contest, lottery, game of chance or skill, for the purpose of promoting, directly or indirectly, the sale, use or supply of any product or any business interest;

(3A) withholding

Explanation.

(4)  

(5)  

(6)   

(2)       

 

 

17.       

18.     

19.            The appellant attempted to attribute to the first respondent the drastically decrease in the prices in the realm of real estate as the cause for his not   

20.      

21.               

22.     

23.     `4 

 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           /KMK*

 
 
 
 
 
 
[HONABLE MRS. M.SHREESHA]
PRESIDING 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.