Haryana

Karnal

105/2011

Ravinder Paul Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Rajinder Mittal Chairman CHD Developers Ltd. - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. H.N. Bansal

10 Jan 2017

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM KARNAL.

                                                               Complaint no. 105 of 2011

                                                               Date of instt.: 15.02.2011

                                                               Date of decision 10.01.2017

 

Ravinder Paul Singhson of Shri Pargat Singh, resident of 6-B Block, ward no.16, Shri Karanpur, District Shir Ganga Nagar (Rajasthan), through special power of attorney- Gurpreet Singh son of Shri Satwinder Singh, resident of Ranwar Road, Adwali Kothi, Karnal.

                                                                                                                                                                                                …………..Complainant

                                                Versus

1. Rajinder Mittal, Chairman, CHD Developers Ltd.

2. Gaurav Mittal son of Rajinder Mittal, Director, CHD Developers Ltd. SF 16-17, First Floor, Madame Bikaji Cama Bhawan, 11, Bhikaji Cama  Place, New Delhi-110066.

And also available at CHD City Karnal.

…………Opposite parties

 

                   Complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

 

Before            Sh.K.C.Sharma……….President.

 Sh.Anil Sharma…….Member.

 

Present:-        Shri  H..N. Bansal Advocate for complainant.

                    Shri Amit Munjal Advocate for opposite parties.

                     

ORDER:

                    The learned counsel of complainant has made statement that due to some technical defects in the complaint, the complainant wants to withdraw the same so that he may file fresh two separate complaints, therefore, the complainant may be allowed to withdraw the complaint with the permission to file two separate complaints and exemption may be granted regarding limitation in respect of the period during which this complaint remained pending.

                   In view of the aforesaid statement of learned counsel for the complainant the complaint is dismissed as withdrawn with permission to file to separate complaint and the period during which the present complaint remained pending would be taken into consideration for the period of limitation. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.

Announced
dated:10.01.2017.

                                                               (K.C.Sharma)

                                                                   President,

                                                         District Consumer Disputes

                                                          Redressal Forum, Karnal.

            (Anil Sharma ) 

               Member.