Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.41 seconds)Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd. vs Abhishek Khanna on 11 January, 2021
10. We have gone through the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt., Ltd., (Supra) and we are satisfied that the current appeal/ complaint is covered by this judgment as it relates to the same project in which the complainant had booked its flat and the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered full refund with interest from the date of the promise of offer of possession till repayment. As this is a covered case, we consider it appropriate to allow the complaint with the following directions:
Pioneer Urban Land And Infrastructure ... vs Govindan Raghavan on 2 April, 2019
The arguments that there was no promise of a service amounting to deficiency in service and misrepresentation constituting an unfair trade practice do not hold water as these issues stand settled in Ireo Grace Realtech Pvt. Ltd., vs Abhishek Khanna (supra) as well as in Pioneer Urban Land Infrastructure Ltd., vs Govindan Raghavan (supra).
M/S. Tdi Infastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs Rajesh Jain on 1 December, 2015
Another contention of the OP is that it is a settled proposition of law that anyone purchasing more than two apartments is not a consumer within the meaning of "consumer" under the CP Act, 1986 in case of M/s TDI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rajesh Jain (2016) CPJ 377 (NC) it was held that a person who buys more than one flat without any reasonable explanation, will not fall under the definition of "consumer" and as such the purpose behind such purchase would deemed to be "commercial purpose" (under the provision of CP Act, 1986), unless the contrary is proved by the complainant with the help of cogent and plausible evidence.
Kavit Ahuja vs Shipra Estate Ltd. & Jai Krishna Estate ... on 12 February, 2015
9. The opposite party has not been able to substantiate its averment that the complainant is not a 'consumer', the onus of which is squarely upon him in terms of Kavita Ahuja vs. Shipra Estate Ltd., & Jai Krishna Estate developers Pvt., Ltd. & Ors. I (2016) CPJ 31 (NC).
Laxmi Engineering Works vs P.S.G. Industrial Institute on 4 April, 1995
As regards the issue whether the complainants are engaged in booking of this flat for a "commercial purpose", it has been settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [ Laxmi Engineering Works vs P S G Industrial Institute - (1995) 3 SCC 583 ] that commercial purpose has to be defined from case to case. Mere booking of multiple units of flats in itself does not constitute commercial purpose.
Consumer Protection Act, 2019
Kolkata West International City Pvt Ltd vs Devasis Rudra on 25 March, 2019
It also reaffirmed that "it would be manifestly unreasonable to construe the contract between the parties as requiring the buyer to wait indefinitely for possession" as laid down in Kolkata West International City Pvt., Ltd. Vs. Devasis Rudra, Civil Appeal No. 3182 of 2019 decided on 25.03.2019 and also that in view of an absence of an OC or offer of possession, the right of the complainant to refund with compensation cannot be denied.
Sunil Kumar Sengar & Anr. vs M/S. Unitech Ltd. on 8 June, 2015
6. The complainant has also relied upon the judgment of this Commission in the case of Satish Kumar Panday vs Unitech Ltd. CC no. 427 of 2014 decided on 08.06.2015.
1