Haryana

StateCommission

EA/41/2023

MEGHA MIDHA - Complainant(s)

Versus

PARSVNATH DEVELOPERS LTD., THROUGH SH. SHAILENDER MODI S/O SH. SUMER MODI, WORKING AS SENIOR MANAGER - Opp.Party(s)

PARDEEP SOLATH

21 Feb 2024

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                         

                                                          Date of Institution:19.07.2023

                                                          Date of final hearing:21.02.2024

                                                          Date of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024

 

 

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO.41 OF 2023 IN

CONSUMER COMPLAINT No. 828 of 2017

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF

 

1. Megha Midha D/o Shri Radhe Shyam, resident of H.No.3046, Sector-28D, Chandigarh.
2. Radhe Shyam S/o Shri Diwan Chand, resident of H.No.3046, Sector-28D, Chandigarh.

 

                                      ….Decree Holders

Versus

 

 

 

1. Parsvnath Developers Ltd., through Shri Shailender Modi son of Shri Sumer Modi, working as Senior Manager (CRM) registered office at Parsvnath Town, Near Shahdra Metro Station, Shahdra, Delhi-110032.
2. M/s Samar Estate Pvt. Ltd., through its Managing Director Shri Vinod Bagai having its registered office at SCO No.254, NAC, Manimajra, Chandigarh.

 

                                                                             …Judgment Debtors

 

 

         

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

                                                                                                                                               

 

Present:     Shri Satbir Mor, proxy counsel for Shri Pardeep Solath, counsel for the decree holders.

                   Shri Nikhil  Sehrawat, proxy counsel for Shri Ashwani Talwar, counsel for judgment debtor No.1.

                   Presence of judgment debtor No.2 already dispensed with for the time being.

 

 

 

 

 

PER: T.P.S. MANN, J.

 

ORDER

 

 

1. Proxy counsel appearing for judgment debtor No.1 states that the parties have entered into compromise and accordingly, the execution be disposed of.
2. Proxy counsel appearing for the decree holders confirms the factum of compromise having been arrived at between the parties and states that for the aforementioned reason, the decree holders wish to withdraw the execution application.
3. In view of the above, the execution stands satisfied and accordingly, the execution application is hereby ordered to be withdrawn.
4. Application(s) pending, if any, stand disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.
5. A copy of this order be provided to all the parties free of cost as mandated by the law. The order be uploaded forthwith on the website of the Commission for the perusal of the parties.
6. File be consigned to record room along with a copy of this order.

 

 

 

(T.P.S. MANN)

PRESIDENT

 

 

 

Pronounced On: 21.02.2024

MS