Haryana

StateCommission

CC/583/2018

SAVITRI MITTAL - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S OMAXE LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

RAHUL MAKKAR

20 Dec 2019

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, HARYANA, PANCHKULA

         

                                     

                                      Civil Miscellaneous Application No.333 of 2019

                                      Date of Institution : 20.12.2019 in                   

                                      Consumer Complaint No.583 of 2018

                                      Date of Institution: 17.10.2018

                                      Date of Decision: 20.12.2019

 

 

Savitri Mittal, aged 60 years, wife of Shri Vinod Mittal, resident of House No.634/30 Char Kothi, Adarsh Nagar, Opposite D Park, Rohtak, Haryana.

…..Complainant

 

 

 

VERSUS

 

 

 

1.      M/s Omaxe Limited (Corporate Office) 7, Local Shopping Centre, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019 through its Chairman/Authorized Officer.

 

2.      M/s Omaxe Limited (Registered Office) Shop No.19-B, First Floor, Omaxe Celebration Mall, Sohna Road, Gurugram (Haryana) through its authorized officer.

 

3.      Mr. Rohtash Goyal, Chairman and Managing Director, M/s Omaxe Limited (Corporate Office) 7, Local Shopping Centre, Kalkaji, New Delhi-110019.

 

….. Opposite Parties

 

 

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

                   Shri Ram Singh Chaudhary, Judicial Member.

 

                    

 

                                     

Present:-    Shri Rohit Goswami, counsel for the complainant/applicant.

                                                

 

                                                O R D E R

 

 

T.P.S. MANN, J.

         

          The present application has been filed by the complainant/applicant with a prayer that the hearing of the complaint be preponed for today and the complainant/applicant be permitted to withdraw the complaint.

2.      The complaint stands adjourned to 27.03.2020 for recording evidence of the complainant.

3.      Learned counsel for the complainant/applicant states that the proceedings in the complaint be preponed for today and she be also permitted to withdraw the complaint with liberty to file fresh complaint with better particulars before the appropriate forum.

4.      Having heard learned counsel for the complainant/applicant and on going through the contents of the application, this Commission finds that the complaint can be preponed for today itself and the complainant/applicant permitted to withdraw the complaint with liberty to file fresh complaint with better particulars before the appropriate forum.

5.      Resultantly, the application is allowed and the complaint is hereby dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the complainant to file fresh complaint with better particulars before the appropriate forum.

 

 

Announced 20.12.2019

(Ram Singh Chaudhary) Judicial Member

(T.P.S. Mann) President

  UK