Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 13 (0.49 seconds)Section 17 in The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [Entire Act]
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Smt. Nisha Rani Aggarwal vs Delhi Development Authority And Anr. on 1 November, 2002
Similar
proposition of law was laid down by this Commission in Consumer
Consumer Complaint No.811 of 2019 12
Complaint No.420 of 2018 (Usha Rani v. Punjab Urban Planning &
Development Authority & Anr.) decided, vide order dated
11.09.2018.
Section 14 in Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Section 28 in Punjab Regional and Town Planning and Development Act, 1995 [Entire Act]
Dr. Navin Khanna & 3 Ors. vs Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd. & ... on 11 April, 2016
10. So far as the plea of the opposite parties that the complaint
is time barred, is concerned, admittedly the complainant made the
payment of entire sale price of the plot, in question, to the opposite
parties, but neither the possession of the same has been delivered to
him till date, nor the amount so deposited by him has been refunded. It
is now well settled that in such cases there is a continuous cause of
action till the possession is delivered or the amount is refunded.
Hon'ble National Commission in "Navin Sharma (Dr.) & others v.
Unitech Reliable Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Anr." 2016(2) CLT 457 has
held that unless or until the complainants get possession of the flats,
they have got continuous cause of action. In para 8 of the said
judgment it has been observed by the Hon'ble National Commission
as under:-