NCDRC

NCDRC

FA/468/2021

M/S. OMAXE LTD. - Complainant(s)

Versus

NIDHI SINGHAL - Opp.Party(s)

M/S. PRAVIN BAHADUR & ASSOCIATES

23 Jul 2021

ORDER

NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
NEW DELHI
 
FIRST APPEAL NO. 468 OF 2021
 
(Against the Order dated 08/12/2020 in Complaint No. 1084/2016 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. M/S. OMAXE LTD.
10, LOCAL SHOPPING COMPLEX, KALKAJI
South East
DELHI
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. NIDHI SINGHAL
FLAT NO. 71, GROUND FLOOR, NORTH AVENUE -II, OMAXE CITY, BAHADURGH
JHAJJAR
HARYANA
...........Respondent(s)
FIRST APPEAL NO. 93 OF 2021
 
(Against the Order dated 08/12/2020 in Complaint No. 1082/2016 of the State Commission Delhi)
1. S,T. NIDHI SINGHAL
W/O. SH. RAVI SINGHAL, R/O. FLAT NO 71, GROUND FLOOR, NORTH AVENUE-II, OMAME CITY
BAHADURGARH
HARYANA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus 
1. M/S. OMAXE LTD.
THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, OMAXE HOUSE, 7, LOCAL SHOPPING CENTRE, KALKAJI
NEW DELHI
...........Respondent(s)

BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA,PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. SUBHASH CHANDRA,MEMBER

For the Appellant :
Mr. Pravin Bahadur, Advocate
For the Respondent :
Mr. O. P. Gupta, Advocate

Dated : 23 Jul 2021
ORDER

ORDER (ORAL)         

         These two cross Appeals have arisen out of the order dated 08.12.2020 of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Delhi (for short “the State Commission”) in Complaint No.1084 of 2016.

2.      Learned Counsel for the parties have pointed out that there is some technical defect in the impugned order to the extent that the directions issued by the State Commission relate only to the Complaint No.1082 of 2016.  It is submitted that although in para 26 of the impugned order, the State Commission has said that these directions would be applicable to other five Complaints, however, the demand raised in all the other Complaints were different than what has been ordered in para 24 of the impugned order.  It is requested that the matter be remanded back to the State Commission for fresh decision.  It is also pointed out by the

 

-3-

learned Counsel appearing for M/s Omaxe Limited that there is                  no mention of the facts of Complaint No.1084 of 2016 in the impugned order.

3.      In view of these submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the impugned order is set aside.  The matter is remanded back to the State Commission for re-hearing.

4.      Parties are directed to appear before the State Commission on 23.08.2021.

5.      Both these Appeals stand disposed of in these terms.

 

 
......................J
DEEPA SHARMA
PRESIDING MEMBER
......................
SUBHASH CHANDRA
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.