Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 31 (0.25 seconds)Section 17 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Bangalore Development Authority vs Syndicate Bank on 17 May, 2007
In Bangalore Development Authority Vs. Syndicate Bank's case (supra), it was the specific case of the Opposite Parties that the scheme was on 'no profit no loss basis', there was escalation in the price of houses by ten times and the delay had occurred on account of contractor's fault. By no stretch of imagination, the allotment in the present case, can be said to be on 'no profit no loss basis'.
Section 11 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Emaar Mgf Land Ltd. & Anr. vs Dilshad Gill on 27 May, 2015
It was clearly stated by the National Commission, in Emaar MGF Land Limited and another Vs. Dilshad Gill, III (2015) CPJ 329 (NC), that when the promoter has violated material condition, in not handing over possession of the unit, in time, it is not obligatory for a purchaser to accept possession after that date.
Aashish Oberai vs Emaar Mgf Land Limited on 14 September, 2016
Further in a case titled as Aashish Oberai Vs. Emaar MGF Land Limited, Consumer Case No.70 of 2015 decided on 14 Sep 2016, under similar circumstances, the National Commission negated the plea taken by the builder while holding as under:-
Section 14 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 3 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Section 8 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
Kavit Ahuja vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishna Estate ... on 12 February, 2015
In a case titled as a case titled as Kavita Ahuja Vs. Shipra Estate Ltd. and Jai Krishna Estate Developer Pvt. Ltd., 2016 (1) CPJ 31, it was held by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, that the buyer(s) of the residential unit(s), would be termed as consumer(s), unless it is proved that he or she had booked the same for commercial purpose.