SUDHA YADAV filed a consumer case on 07 Apr 2016 against M2K INFRASTRUCTURE in the StateCommission Consumer Court. The case no is CC/60/2016 and the judgment uploaded on 16 May 2016.
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA.
Complaint No.60 of 2016
Date of Institution: 09.03.2016
Date of Decision: 07.04.2016
1. Sudha Yadav D/o Sh.R.C.Yadav,
2. Ritesh Parkash Yadav son of Sudha Yadav, Both resident of House NO.2064, Sector 4 Urban Estate, Gurgaon.
…..Complainants
Versus
1. M/s Ashray Real Estate GF 27 Sohna road Gurgaon through its authorized signatory.
2. M/s M2K infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. B-13/29 Harsha Bhawan Connaught Circus, New Delhi through its Authorized signatory.
…..Opposite Parties
CORAM: Mr. R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member.
Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri, Member.
For the parties: Mr.Ravi Kant proxy counsel for Mr. R.S.Badhran, Advocate counsel for the complainant.
O R D E R
R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER :-
In the present dispute, complainant has requested to give relief as mentioned below:
2. Heard. File perused.
3. The value of this claim is much less than Rs.20 lakhs, but, the complainant is alleging that value of the apartment is Rs.21,30,375/- and that is why this Commission is heaving pecuniary jurisdiction. As per opinion of this Commission in Vinita Goyal Vs. M/s Unitech Limited III (2014) CPJ 139 (Har.) value of the flat cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose of pecuniary jurisdiction. So this Commission is not having pecuniary jurisdiction to try this complaint and it be returned to the complainant to file it before appropriate Forum.
April 07th, 2016 | Mrs.Urvashi Agnihotri Member, Addl.Bench |
| R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench |
S.K.
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.