NCDRC

NCDRC

RP/3913/2009

SRICHAND G. CHHABRIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

MANOHARLAL BAJAJ & ANR. - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

05 Jan 2010

ORDER


NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSIONNEW DELHIREVISION PETITION NO. 3913 OF 2009
(Against the Order dated 29/07/2009 in Appeal No. 525/2009 of the State Commission Karnataka)
1. SRICHAND G. CHHABRIANo.17, Lakshmi Road, 6th Cross, Shanthi Nagar,Bangalore - 27KARNATAKA ...........Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. MANOHARLAL BAJAJ & ANR.M/s. Highland Holiday Homes Pvt. Ltd. (A Unit of the Cisons Group), Cismons Complex, 5th Floor 150, Montieth Road,Cheenai - 600 008TAMIL NADU2. THE MANAGER, M/S. HIGHLAND HOLIDAY HOMES PVT. LTD.Manipal Centre, 47, Dickenson Road, Rear Wing, 5th Magazine Floor,Balngalore - 560 042KARNATAKA ...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. GUPTA ,PRESIDING MEMBERHON'BLE MRS. RAJYALAKSHMI RAO ,MEMBER
For the Petitioner :NEMO
For the Respondent :NEMO

Dated : 05 Jan 2010
ORDER

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.

Complaint filed by the petitioner on contest was allowed by the District Forum with direction to OP Nos.1 and 3 to refund the amount of Rs.1,25,000/- with interest @ 12% p.a. and pay Rs.10,000/- as cost to the petitioner.  This order also notices that if this direction is complied with, the petitioner has to release right, title and interest in respect of the plot touching the sale deed referred to in the case in favour of opposite party Co. at the cost and expenditure of the Co. through a registered deed.  Dissatisfied with Forum’s order, the petitioner filed appeal which has been disposed of by order dated 29.7.2009 under challenge. State Commission has enhanced the rate of interest from 12% to 18% p.a.  Petitioner contends that he is entitled to the returns and benefits under the scheme.  Para 4 of the order of State Commission specifically deals with this issue and the same has been decided against the petitioner.  We do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the approach of State Commission   regarding the said issue.  Revision is, therefore, dismissed.

 

 



......................JK.S. GUPTAPRESIDING MEMBER
......................RAJYALAKSHMI RAOMEMBER