Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/292/2010

Naresh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Taneja Developers - Opp.Party(s)

Dinesh Bagga

10 May 2010

ORDER


CHANDIGARH DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-IPlot No. 5-B, Sector 19-B, Madhya marg, Chandigarh - 160019
CONSUMER CASE NO. 292 of 2010
1. NareshS/o Sh. Hari Shankar R/o # 49 Phase-I, Bapu Dham Colony Sector-26, Chandigarh ...........Appellant(s)

Vs.
1. Taneja Developersand Infrastrutures Ltd.(Corporate office) 9, Kasturba Gandhi marg, cannaought Place New Delhi.2. Taneja developers and Infrastrutures Ltd.(Regional office)SCO No. 1098-1099 Sector-22/B, Chandigarh3. The Barnch Manager State bank of IndiaSCO No. 64-65 Sector-30, Chandigarh ...........Respondent(s)


For the Appellant :
For the Respondent :

Dated : 10 May 2010
ORDER

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.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I

U.T. CHANDIGARH

 

                                                            Complaint Case No. 292 of 2010

 

 

Naresh s/o Shri Hari Shankar, resident of House No.49, Phase I, Bapu Dham Colony, Sector 26, Chandigarh.                                                    –              Complainant

 

                                                Versus

 

1.         Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd. (Corporate Office), 9, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi.

 2.        Taneja Developers and Infrastructure Ltd. (Regional Office), SCO No.1098-1099, Sector 22-B, Chandigarh.

3.         The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, SCO No.64-65, Sector 30, Chandigarh.                                                                                                                                                                                                    –            Opposite Parties

 

Present:          Sh.Dinesh Bagga, Advocate for Complainant.

                                               

                                                            ORDER

 

                        The learned counsel for complainant has made statement that due to technical defect; he may kindly be allowed to withdraw this complaint with liberty to file afresh on the same cause of action at a latter date after removal of the defect.  Accordingly, the complaint is allowed to be withdrawn without prejudice to the right of the complainant to file afresh on the same cause of action after removal of the defect, as permitted by law.

                        Copies of this order free of cost be supplied to the parties. The file be consigned.

 

 

10.05.2010      (MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA)      (RAJINDER SINGH GILL)       (ASHOK RAJ BHANDARI)

                          MEMBER                                                     MEMBER                                              PRESIDING MEMBER                                

 


DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, PRESIDING MEMBER ,