herein are
similar. Therefore, both these cases are
being decided through a common judgment.
2. The case of the complainants,
Sh. Subhash Chander Mahajan ... measuring 1855 sq.ft in the Parsvnath Privilege
Complex situated in Plot No.11, Sector
P-1, Chauraisin Estate, Greater Noida. Both the complainants were
subsequently filed on 12.2.2013. It
states that he had purchased the plot for the hospital from M/s. Sahara India by
a registered sale deed ... apartment buyers
that common areas and facilities should also include shops, parking areas,
community centres, nursery schools, and other common
facilities. Honble Supreme Court
schedule attached with the
agreement like water supply, sewerage, drainage, electrical wiring, common
facilities etc. shall be provided by the petitioner to the complainant ... versus Gopal Lal
Sharma (supra), the cancellation of allotment of plot was held to be
valid, because the allottee failed to make payment,
even after
Rajasthan Petitioners
Versus
1. Sawarmal
S/o Sh. Tara Chand
R/o Plot No. 95, Maliyon
Ki Gali,
Behind Post Office,
Subhash Chowk,
Patanada,
Jodhpur ... Solanki,
Sindhi Dharamshala
Ki Gali,
Ratanada,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan,
At present R/o
Plot No. 60,
Near Siyana
House, Subhash Chowk
Ratanada,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan Respondents
REVISION
District Forum
and for dismissal of the complaint.
8. State Commission vide
common impugned order, dismissed both the appeals.
9.
Hence, the present
revision petition ... stated in the allotment letter, vide which the construction on the
plot should have been raised within three years from the date of allotment
petitions are common and same question of law is involved as such these
revision petitions are being disposed of by this common order ... facts of the case of the Respondent/Complainant he has purchased a plot No.792 Sector-7,Ambala City was
originally allotted to Mrs. Nancy
special condition :
disbursement subject to registration of property.
10. The
said plot was sanctioned to construct a G+3 storied residential building by
Bally Municipality ... page 6 Electrical Wiring, Generator, Common Meter and Meter
Room was to be installed and provided by the developer which is included in
consideration price
Andhra Pradesh
Vs.
V.Satish Chandra .........
Respondent
s/o Kotaiah
r/o Plot no.41 & 42
Flat No.301, Dhaynish Towers
Pragathinagar, Qutubullapur Mandal ... Andhra Pradesh
Vs.
M.Vishveshwer Rao .........
Respondent
s/o Jagannadham
r/o Plot no.984
Pragathinagar, Qutubullapur Mandal
R.R.District, Andhra Pradesh
BEFORE
size of
the property (Bungalow A/3 and appurtenant land alongwith
common areas and facilities (Ex. G & H of the Agreement) located in Webb ... Surrounding Plot
and Facilities 370
SM @ 28,000 = Rs.1,03,60,000
TOTAL
VALUE = Rs.127,60,000
(Rupees
One Crore Twenty Seven Lakh
PRESIDING MEMBER
These
revision petitions arise out of the common order; hence, decided by common
order.
2. These revision petitions have been filed ... affirmed.
3. Brief facts of the case are that complainant/respondent purchased
Plot No. 16, measuring 2450 sq. ft. from OP/respondent. As per site
