STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH (COMPLAINT CASE NO.24 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 12.04.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Abhinav Sharma s/o late Sh. Harbans Lal r/o 37-B, Ashok Nagar, Ambala Cantt-133001. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvnath Developers Limited, Registered & Corp. Office at 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. Address for service : SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Sector 26, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh 2. Chandigarh Housing Board, Office at 8, Janmarg, Sector 9, Chandigarh ....OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. By this common order we propose to dispose of the following 12 connected consumer complaints in which common questions of law and fact are involved :- i) C.C. No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. ii) C.C. No.27 of 2010-Vijay Aggarwal & Anr. Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. iii) C.C. No.29 of 2010-Sudeep Budhiraja Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. iv) C.C. No.37 of 2010-Baijnath Agarwala & Sons (HUF) Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Ors. v) C.C. No.38 of 2010-UAL Industries Limited Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Ors. vi) C.C. No.39 of 2010-Mrs. Palo Singh Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Ors. vii) C.C. No.40 of 2010-Mr. Ajmer Singh Johal Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Ors. viii) C.C. No.41 of 2010-Nirmal Singh Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developer Ltd. & Ors. ix) C.C. No.42 of 2010-Harbhajan Singh Braich & Ors. Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. x) C.C. No.44 of 2010-Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Dhillon Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Ors. xi) C.C. No.45 of 2010-Mr. Gurjeet Singh Johar & Anr. Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. xii) C.C. No.46 of 2010-Harpal Singh Brar & Anr. Vs. M/s Parsvnath Developers Ltd. & Anr. 2. The facts may be gathered from Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 3. Succinctly put, allured by the advertisements given by OP-1, the complainant vide application dated 6.12.2007 applied for a 4 Bed Room flat in B category measuring 3520 sq. ft. super area and deposited the cheque No.111252 amounting to Rs.12,58,400/- as earnest money. Accordingly he was issued Flat/Unit No.G03 vide letter dated 3.1.2008 as per which the payment plan was construction linked. Subsequently on the request of the complainant the flat No. was changed to B25-GO3 by OP-1 vide their letter dated 22.1.2008. On the assurance of the OP that the flats would be ready for delivery within 36 months from 6.10.2006, the complainant paid the subsequent instalments on their due dates. The OP entered into Flat Buyer Agreement with the complainant on 7.4.2008. However, after making payment of Rs.64,92,000/- the complainant came to know that the project came to stand still and the construction came to halt. He vide his letter dated 15.12.2009 requested the OP for cancellation of flat and refund of his amount but to no avail. Hence this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. 4. In their written reply Parsvnath Developers Ltd./OP-1 admitted that the complainant was allotted the flat with tentative super area of 3520sq.ft. for basic price of Rs.2,51,68,000/-(?) and he was to deposit payment as per construction linked payment plan and further that the payments towards part payment of the allotted price were received. However, it has been stated that the execution of the project and the time period of completion were subject to the provisions of the development agreement and the Flat Buyer Agreement. It has been admitted that the letter seeking cancellation of the flat and refund of the amount has been received from the complainant but it has been denied that the project was terminated and rather the same was delayed on account of non performance on the part of Chandigarh Housing Board (hereinafter referred to as CHB) and dispute already stands referred to the Arbitration in terms of the development agreement. It has been submitted that the complainants were entitled to refund of the amount upon cancellation of the allotment after deduction of 5% of the basic price of the flat. Pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part, prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 5. Though the Chandigarh Housing Board did not file reply in this complaint case yet the ld. Counsel appearing on their behalf stated at the bar that it adopts the reply given in other connected complaint cases. It has been stated by the CHB that the complainant had entered into Flat Buyer Agreement with the Developer/OP-1 wherein besides other terms and conditions, it was agreed that as per clause 5(a) in the eventuality of cancellation, earnest money being 5% of the basic price would be forfeited and the balance, if any, would be refundable without interest. It has been submitted that all signatories to the agreement were bound by their respective obligations mentioned therein. It was further stated that according to clause 9(e) of the Agreement, it was the responsibility of the developer to timely deliver the residential unit to the buyer and the complainant rightly attributed delay on the developer in his complaint because the Housing Board was only to provide the land to the developer. It was pleaded that as no deficiency was alleged against the CHB, so the complaint against it was liable to be dismissed. 6. Both the parties were given opportunity to lead evidence in support of their contentions. 7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully gone through the record and material placed on the files of all the aforesaid complaints. 8. The first and foremost point of argument raised on behalf of the complainant(s) is that they had entered into a tripartite Flat Buyer Agreement which is duly signed by the buyer (complainant), Parsvnath Developers Limited (Developer) and the CHB. As per terms and conditions of the said agreement, copy of which is placed on file, complainants had deposited the required amounts with Parsvnath Developers Limited for the purchase of their respective flats, the possession thereof was to be handed over within three years i.e. 36 months from the date of signing of the Development Agreement between the Parsvnath Developers Limited and CHB. The said Development Agreement was signed on 6.10.2006 and thereafter the CHB had handed over the possession of 123.79 acres of land to the Parsvnath Developers Limited for raising the construction of flats. According to learned counsel for complainants, no steps whatsoever were taken for the completion of the flats by the Parsvnath Developers Limited. Not only that, the amounts deposited by the complainants have not been returned so far in spite of the fact that the period of 36 months had expired on 5.10.2009 upto which date the possession of the flats was to be handed over. After putting forth the aforesaid points of arguments, complainants sought refund of their amounts together with interest and compensation. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for Parsvnath Developers Limited submitted that the possession of the project land delivered to them was not free from encumbrances, so it was not possible to raise construction thereon. Then it was also argued that the amounts deposited towards cost of flats by the complainant is not with the developers, rather it is lying deposited in the joint account with CHB and that the account is not being operated upon by the Parsvnath Developers Limited. At the same time, learned counsel for CHB also repelled the points of arguments raised on behalf of the complainants and submitted that in fact complainants are entitled to refund of their amounts only after making deduction of 5% of the basic sale price. It was also argued that in fact there was no legal hitch in raising construction over the area of 123.79 acres of land which was meant for residential purpose only. The dispute, if any was with regard to remaining project land, which was earmarked for commercial activities. It was also argued that CHB is not liable for making any compensation of any kind, if any, payable to the complainants as per stipulation incorporated in clause-9(c) of the Flat Buyer Agreement. However, at the fag end of his arguments, it was also submitted that in case the amounts are ordered to be refunded to the complainants that can be refunded only after making deduction of 5% of the basic sale price from the amounts deposited by the complainants. 10. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the above points raised on behalf of the parties and have also gone through the relevant terms and conditions of the Development Agreement dated 6.10.2006 and Flat Buyer Agreement. Before we proceed further, it is pertinent to mention here that both OPs i.e. Parsvnath Developers Limited and CHB have fairly admitted that at the spot the project in terms of the Scheme and the Agreement could not take off in spite of the expiry of 36 months period within which the possession of the flat was agreed to be handed over. Thus, now the question to be determined before us is as to who is liable to refund the amounts deposited by complainants and interest thereon as well as compensation. In this regard, both parties have made reference to various clauses of the Flat Buyer Agreement, which is duly signed by the Complainants, Developers and CHB. Clause-(a) at page-3 of this Agreement goes to show that the Development Agreement had already been signed between OPs i.e. Parsvnath Developers Limited and CHB on 6.10.2006 and thereafter developer had also acquired development rights in 123.79 acres of land (Project Land) which was meant for residential purposes. Meaning thereby, the project was to be completed on or before 5.10.2009 but no steps whatsoever are shown to have been taken so far for raising construction thereon. 11. It is apparent from clause-2(d) that all the payments towards the construction amount including basic price and other charges payable in terms of Scheme of Allotment and the said agreement was to be paid by Account Payee Cheque/bank drafts in the name of Parsvnath Developers Limited-CHB A/c No.30184417088 payable at Chandigarh. This indicates that both OPs are jointly holding the account in which the amounts of complainants are lying deposited. No doubt that in the case of any breach of condition or terms of the Agreement by the buyer, the allotment was liable to be cancelled and in that eventuality 5% of the basic price was be forfeited and the balance, if any, was refundable with interest as laid down in clause 5(a) of the aforesaid tripartite Agreement. Admittedly there is no breach of any condition of the Agreement committed by any of the complainants regarding payment towards the cost of the flats whereas OPs are proved to have not carried out the terms and conditions in its letter and spirit as required under the Agreement which was duly signed by the parties. Moreover, if there was any dispute between OPs regarding delivery of the possession of Project Land or raising of construction thereon for that complainants cannot be allowed to suffer and at the same time OPs also cannot be allowed to take benefit of their own wrongs. Thus, it is a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of OPs. It is well established that the Parsvnath Developers Limited had constructed a sample flat at the site of the project land which allured the complainants who deposited huge amounts in order to fulfill their dreams of having the same kind of flat. Admittedly not a single brick has been laid at the spot and the money collected from the buyers in crores of rupees is being used by OPs without taking any steps to refund the same to them. All these acts on the part of OPs also amount to unfair trade practice. In this view of the matter, question of making any deduction while refunding the deposited amounts of complainants does not arise. 12. Now adverting to the Clause-9(d) of the Flat Buyer Agreement, therein it was agreed upon between both the parties that if the developer is unable to deliver the unit to the buyer, the Developer and CHB shall be liable to refund the buyer the amount received from them with interest. The said clause in fact reads as under :- “9(d) If as a result of any rules or directions of the Government or if any competent authority delays, withholds, denies the grant of necessary approvals for the Project, or if due to any force majeure conditions, the Developer is unable to deliver the unit to the Buyer, the Developer and CHB shall be liable to refund to the Buyer the amounts received from the Buyer with interest at the SBI Term Deposit Rate as applicable on the date of refund.” 13. Thus, a perusal of the aforesaid clause goes a long way to show that the complainants are entitled to interest over their amounts deposited with OPs at the SBI term deposit rate as applicable on the date of refund. We are told that interest on the term deposit amount for two years to less than three years is 7.75% p.a. which in the given facts and circumstances is applicable in all the cases before us. 14. Now at the end, we take the question of compensation payable to the complainant and by whom? In this regard, again we shall have to go by the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties incorporated in clause-9 (c) of the Flat Buyer Agreement and the same is reproduced below:- “9(c) In case of possession of the built up area is not offered to the Buyer within a period of 36 months or extended period as stipulated in sub-clause (a) above the Buyer shall be entitled to receive from Developer compensation @ Rs.107.60 per sq.mtr (Rs.10/- per sq.ft) of the super area of the unit per month and to no other compensation of any kind. In case the Buyer fails to clear his account and take possession of the unit within30 days of offer, the Buyer shall be liable to pay to the developer holding charges @ 107.60 per sq.mtr. (Rs.10/- per sq.ft) of the super area of the unit per month in addition to the liability to pay interest to the sellers and other consequences of default in payment. ” 15. Thus, a perusal of the aforementioned clause makes the Parsvnath Developers Limited alone accountable for making payment of compensation @ 107.60 per sq. mtr (Rs.10/- per sq.ft) of the super area of the unit per month. To our mind, none of the signatories to the tripartite Flat Buyer Agreement can wriggle out of the terms and conditions laid therein. 16. Therefore, in view of the foregoing discussion, all the complaints are allowed with costs of Rs.5000/- each, in the following terms ; (i) Parsvnath Developers Limited and Chandigarh Housing Board jointly and severally are held liable to refund the amounts deposited by the complainants in each complaint case alongwith interest @ 7.75% p.a. with effect from respective dates of deposits till actual realization; (ii) Parsvnath Developers Limited shall also pay compensation in each complaint case for not offering the built up flat within 36 months @ Rs.107.60 per sq. mtr (Rs.10/- per sq.ft) of the super area of the unit per month from 5.10.2009 (i.e. the last date of completion of the project) till actual payment to the complainants. (iii) The aforesaid directions shall be complied with by OPs in all these complaints within 30 days from the date the copy of order is received, failing which they shall be liable to pay penal interest @ 12% p.a. on the aforesaid payable amounts. Certified copies of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. The file be consigned to records. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER hg
STATE COMMISSION (COMPLAINT CASE NO. 24 OF 2010) Argued by: Sh. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 Dated the 27th day of October, 2010. ORDER Vide our detailed order of even date recorded separately, this complaint alongwith the other connected consumer complaints has been allowed. (JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL) (JUSTICE PRITAM PAL) (NEENA SAHDHU) MEMBER PRESIDENT MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.27 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 10.05.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. 1. Vijay Aggarwal son of Major R. Sahai. 2. Mona Aggarwal wife of Shri Vijay Aggarwal, Residents of H.No.854, Sector 15A, Faridabad. ……Complainants. V e r s u s1. M/s Parsvnath Developer Ltd., Regd. Office at 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 through its Managing Director Shri P.K. Jain. 2. Chandigarh Housing Board, Sector 9, Chandigarh through its Chairman. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. Vijay Kumar Jindal, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.29 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 18.5.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Sudeep Budhiraja HUF through its Karta Sudeep Budhiraja resident of House No.12, Sector 2, Chandigarh. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvnath Developers Limited, Registered & Corp. Office at 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 2nd Address: SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Sector 26, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh. 2. Chandigarh Housing Board, Office at 8, Janmarg, Sector 9, Chandigarh. ....OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. Deepanjay Sharma, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.37 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 25.05.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Baijnath Agarwala & Sons (HUF), 140/4B, N.S.C. Bose Road, Tollygune, Kolkata-700040 through G.S. Chaddha, duly authorized representative. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvnath Developers Limited through its Director SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered and Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. Chandigarh Housing Board through the Chairman, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh ....OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. Arun Kumar, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3. PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.38 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 25.05.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. UAL Industries Limited, Corporate Office, Komark – Mani Uday, 16 Mayfair Road, Kolkata-700019 through G.S. Chaddha duly authorized representative. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvnath Developers Limited through its Director SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. Chandigarh Housing Board through the Chairman, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh ....OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. Arun Kumar, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.39 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 31.05.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Mrs. Palo Singh w/o Sh. Daljit Singh (NRI), resident of 47, Morrab Gardens, Seven Kings Essex, ILFORD, U.K. through his Power of Attorney Holder Sh. Daljit Singh, r/o H.No.541, Sector 8-B, Chandigarh ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvanath Developers Limited through its Director, SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. The Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Janmarg, Sector 9, Chandigarh. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.40 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 04.06.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Mr. Ajmer Singh Johal s/o Sh. Inderjit Singh Johal (NRI), resident of Coalbourn Cottage, Whitwick Road, Mark Field, Leicester Shire LE 679QB, U.K, through his Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Nirmal Singh s/o Sh. Chanan Singh, resident of Coalbourn Cottage, Whitwick Road, Mark Field, Leicester LE 679 QB, U.K. presently residing at village Barnala Kala, District Nawanshaher, Punjab. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvanath Developers Limited through its Director, SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. The Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.41 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 04.06.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Mr. Nirmal Singh s/o Sh. Chanan Singh (NRI), resident of Coalbourn Cottage, Whitwick Road, Mark Field, Leicester LE 679 QB, U.K. now presently residing at village Barnala Kala, District Nawanshaher, Punjab. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvanath Developers Limited through its Director, SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. The Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.42 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 16.06.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. 1. Harbhajan Singh Braich s/o Harnam Singh 2. Mohinder Kaur Braich w/o Harbhajan Singh 3. Lovaleen Kaur Rair w/o Jagbinder Rair All rs/o J 25, South City-1, Gurgaon. ……Complainants. V e r s u s1. Parshavnath Developers Ltd., SCO-1, First Floor, Sector 26, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh. 2. Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh through its Chairman 160009. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: None for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1 Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.44 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 28.06.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. Mr. Kanwaljit Singh Dhillon s/o Sh. Channon Singh (NRI), resident of 32 Dunellan Road, Milngavie Glasgow G627RE, U.K. through his Power of Attorney Holder Mr. Nirmal Singh s/o Sh. Chanan Singh, resident of Coalbourn Cottage, Whitwick Road, Mark Field, Leicester LE 679 QB, U.K. presently residing at village Barnala Kala, District Nawanshaher, Punjab. ……Complainant. V e r s u s1. Parsvanath Developers Limited through its Director, SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Director, Parsvanath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. The Chairman, Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the complainant. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.45 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 01.07.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. 1. Mr. Gurjeet Singh Johar r/o #11, Club Drive, M.G. Road, Ghitorni, New Delhi-110030. 2. Mrs. Sumeet Johar, r/o #11, Club Drive, M.G. Road, Ghitorni, New Delhi-110030. ……Complainants. V e r s u s1. M/s Parsvanath Developers Limited, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building-19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. Through Its Managing Director/Principal Officer, having its local office at SCO No.1, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. Chandigarh Housing Board, 8 Jan Marg, Sector 9-B, Chandigarh through its Principal Officer/Estate Officer. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Ms. Alka Sarin, Advocate for the complainants. Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OP-1. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-2 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, U.T., CHANDIGARH(COMPLAINT CASE NO.46 OF 2010) Date of Institution: 04.06.2010 Date of Decision : 27.10.2010. 1. Harpal Singh Brar s/o S. Harchand Singh Brar r/o 5, Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi. 2. Dr. Ranjit Singh Brar s/o Sh. Harpal Singh Brar r/o 5, Jantar Mantar Road, New Delhi. ……Complainants. V e r s u s1. Parsavnath Developers Limited through its Director, SCO No.1, 1st Floor, Madhya Marg, Sector 26, Chandigarh. 2. The Managing Director, Parsavnath Developers Limited, Registered & Corporate Office, 6th Floor, Arunachal Building, 19, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001. 3. Chandigarh Housing Board, 8, Jan Marg, Sector 9, Chandigarh through its Chairman. .... OPs. BEFORE: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT. MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER SH. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. Argued by: Sh. A.R. Takkar, Adv. with Mr. Vineet Yadav, Adv. for complainants Sh. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for OPs 1 & 2. Ms. Uma Gupta, Adv. for OP-3 PER JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER. 1. For orders, see the orders passed in Complaint Case No.24 of 2010-Abhinav Sharma Vs. Parsvnath Developers Limited & Anr. 2. Copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. Pronounced. 27th October, 2010. Sd/- [JUSTICE PRITAM PAL] PRESIDENT Sd/- [NEENA SANDHU] MEMBER Sd/- [JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL] MEMBER
| | HON'BLE MRS. NEENA SANDHU, MEMBER | HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITAM PAL, PRESIDENT | HON'BLE MR. JAGROOP SINGH MAHAL, MEMBER | | 
