Search results
- Veena Khanna vs Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd is a case heard by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in 2007. The case deals with the issue of delay in the completion of a property project and the liability of the builder for compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
www.lawyersclubindia.com/judiciary/delay-in-possession-of-flat-makes-builder-liable-to-pay-adequate-compensation-at-par-with-contemporary-market-prices-or-deliver-possession-of-the-same-flat-or-a-flat-of-comparable-size-in-the-same-locality-to-the-consumer-6537.asp
Jul 9, 2007 · Mrs. Veena Khanna vs M/S. Ansal Properties on 9 July, 2007. Warning on translation. Get this document in PDF. Print it on a file/printer. Download Court Copy. Select the following parts of the judgment.
- Subject
- Important Provisions
- Overview
- Issues Raised
- Arguments Advanced by The Appellant
- Arguments Advanced by The Respondent
- Judgement Analysis
- Conclusion
Veena Khanna vs Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd is a case heard by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in 2007. The case deals with the issue of delay in the completion of a property project and the liability of the builder for compensation under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
The Consumer Protection Act of 1986:
1. Section 2(g)- Deficiency is defined as any flaw, imperfection, shortcoming, or defect in the feature, quality, amount, nature, worth, authenticity, capacity, or standard that must be maintained and regulated in accordance with the laws and statutes in effect or any agreement/contract claimed by the seller with regard to the products and goods. According to the Consumer Protection Act of 1986, the party who is offended by the developer's failure to deliver the property on time may register...
On 9.7.1996, the complainant made an offer to buy a flat for a total of Rs. 23,33,344/-, and the parties came to an agreement to this effect. Following that, the complainant made payments totaling...The Complainant wanted a refund of the deposit amount plus interest at a rate of 18% per annum for this deficiency of service on the side of the Opposing Parties, but the Opposing Party refused to...The Delhi State Commission accepted the complaint and ordered the opposing party to return Rs. 15 lakhs with interest accruing at a rate of 13% per year from the date the last installment was depos...The complainant filed an appeal against that decision in the hopes that the opposite parties (builders) would be ordered to deliver the apartment's possession and that she would get appropriate com...The Consumer Protection Act of 1986:
Passed in order to defend consumers' interests, according to the preamble- It accomplishes the entire goal of enabling the average person to obtain goods and services that live up to the quality claims made by the seller or provider. The consumer has the right to seek compensation for any deficiencies by contacting the appropriate state or federal body. It shields the average person against wrongdoing by service providers and retailers. The consumer is given the opportunity to make a complain...
The appellant was prepared and willing to take possession of the apartment, but the builder's construction of the apartments took an unusually long time.It is further argued that the plaintiff could not wait years to take a risk because they were government employees. She was thus compelled to register a complaint in order to request a refund of th...It is false and is refuted that Respondents have provided subpar service. The flat's construction has already been finished, and finishing tasks have been started and are moving along quickly, whic...The Complainant is not permitted to unilaterally and arbitrarily withdraw from the parties' completed contract or demand a return of any money already paid to the Respondents or interest thereon.Due to a construction agreement between the parties, the Respondents have already made a sizable investment in the building of the apartment, and it is now too late for the Complainant to withdraw...The Complainant was not subjected to any mental anguish, mental torture, or mental harassment at the hands of the Respondents, it is further disputed.Due to the growth in the price of real estate, it appears that the builder took unfair advantage of the State Commission's previously mentioned order, which provided the opposite parties with a pre...Just because there was no proper compensation granted and there was a choice to either refund the money or hand over possession of the apartment did the opposing parties take advantage.In light of the builder's (Opposite Parties) aforementioned stance, National commission observed that the State Commission could have issued a specific order instructing the builder to deliver owne...In courts view, it is true that the Complainant has prayed for the refund of the amount, but this complaint remained pending before the State Commission for more than five years It is well known th...A State Commission decision was overturned by the National Commission. The National Commission noted that a refund of money with interest charged at the bank rate does not necessarily mean that the...According to the ruling, the State Commission was required to order the builder to give the customer ownership of the same apartment or an apartment of an equivalent size together with compensation...In any case, sufficient compensation ought to have been given to allow the complaint to buy a new flat of the same size at the going rate. Interest payments by themselves are insufficient payment.Furthermore, while it is true that the State Commission ordered a refund of the amount deposited with interest that the complainant was paying to the bank, this does not imply that the complainant...- CCI Team
Jul 9, 2007 · It is the say of the complaint that in response to the advertisement for construction and sale of flats by the Opposite Party Nos. 1 & 2, the Complainant offered to purchase a flat for a total consideration of Rs.23,33,344/-, and an agreement to this effect was entered into between the parties on 9.7.1996.
Apr 1, 2023 · CASE TITLE- Veena Khanna vs Ansal Properties and Industries Limited. DATE OF ORDER- 9 July 2007. BENCH - HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.B. SHAH, PRESIDENT, MRS. RAJYALAKSHMI RAO, MEMBER. PARTIES- Petitioner: Mrs. Veena Khanna Respondent: M/s. Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd., M/s. Adharshila Towers (Pvt.) Ltd. & M/s. Ansal Buildwell Ltd. SUBJECT-
- CCI Team
Apr 23, 2023 · In the case of Veena Khanna vs. Ansal Properties & Industries Ltd., (NCDRC, 2007, CPJ 185) National Commission overturned a State Commission order observing that a refund of money with interest at the bank rate does not imply that the complainant has been adequately compensated for the builder’s delay in completing the flat. Due to delays in ...
Against the above Order of State Commission, the Complainant Mrs. Veena Khanna filed an Appeal in the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission praying that the Opposite Parties be directed to deliver the possession of the flat and also compensation for delay in delivery or adequate compensation should be awarded so that she can purchase a ...
Jul 9, 2007 · In our view, it is true that the Complainant has prayed for the refund of the amount, but this complaint remained pending before the State Commission for more than five years. During that period, it is a known fact that there was tremendous rise in the market prices of the immovable property.
