
Omaxe Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Private Limited
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Savinder Singh Gill Adv.
Respondant Advocate
Vakalatnama on behalf of the judgment debtors not filed. It is stated by Counsel for the parties that an amount of Rs.60,000/- stood paid. Sh. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, Counsel for the judgment debtors states that TDS Certificate qua the amount deducted towards income tax has als...
Case Number: 335
|
Date of Filing: 30-11-2018
|
Date of Upload: 31-12-2018
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Tejeshwar Singh, Adv.
Respondant Advocate
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,U.T., CHANDIGARHComplaint case No.:225 of 2018Date of Institution:17.05.2018Date of Decision:17.12.2018Jugal Kishore Seth s/o Sh. Ram Gopal Seth, r/o NF 44 Quilla Mohalla, Jalandhar.……ComplainantV e r s u s1. Omaxe Chand...
Case Number: 225
|
Date of Filing: 17-05-2018
|
Date of Upload: 21-12-2018
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Rajesh Maharshi
Respondant Advocate
BEFORE THE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,RAJASTHAN,JAIPUR BENCH NO.1FIRST APPEAL NO: 740/2017Omaxe City, 111, Milestone, Near Bar ke Balaji, Bus stand, Near Kohinoor Marble, Jaipur Ajmer Express Highway, Jaipur & ors.Vs.Ravinder Kumar Sharma s/o S.N.Sharma r/o 81/59 ...
Case Number: 740
|
Date of Filing: 22-06-2017
|
Date of Upload: 17-12-2018
Omaxe Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Private Limited
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Savinder Singh Gill, Adv. & Hoshiar Chand Adv.
Respondant Advocate
It is stated that during pendency of this execution application, after deducting TDS, an amount of Rs.28,630/- stands released to the decree holder. Be that as it may, it is stated by Sh. Savinder Singh Gill, Advocate, Counsel for the decree holder that the said calculation was o...
Case Number: 322
|
Date of Filing: 13-11-2018
|
Date of Upload: 28-12-2018
Court Name: DF-I
Appelant Advocate G.S. Jagpal
Respondant Advocate
District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-I, U.T., Chandigarh Execution Application NO. 185 OF 2018in CC/645/2011Vivek Jain Vs M/s Omaxe Limited BEFORE: RATTAN SINGH THAKUR, PRESIDENT SURJEET KAUR, MEMBER SURESH KUMAR SARDANA, MEMBERPRESENT: Sh.G.S.Jagpal, Counsel for Complainan...
Case Number: 185
|
Date of Filing: 28-11-2018
|
Date of Upload: 04-12-2018
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Rupali S Verma, Adv.
Respondant Advocate Munish Gupta, Adv.
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,U.T., CHANDIGARHComplaint case No.:187 of 2018Date of Institution:27.04.2018Date of Decision:29.11.2018Lt. Col. Jagmohan Singh S/o Lt. Col. (Retd.) Balbir Singh,Anupreet W/o Lt. Col. Jagmohan Singh,Both residents of Head Quarter, 67 In...
Case Number: 187
|
Date of Filing: 27-04-2018
|
Date of Upload: 05-12-2018
Court Name: South II
Appelant Advocate
Respondant Advocate
Udyog Sadan Qutub Institutional Area New Delhi-16Heading2Complaint Case No. CC/130/2012( Date of Filing : 02 Apr 2012 )1. SATISH KUMAR MITTALFLAT NO.-35, SEC-13, ROHINI, NEW DELHI-110085............Complainant(s)Versus1. M/S. OMAXE LTD.7, LOCAL SHOPPING CENTER, KALKAJI, NEW DELHI...
Case Number: 130
|
Date of Filing: 02-04-2012
|
Date of Upload: 06-12-2018
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Safia Paul
Respondant Advocate
FIRST ADDITIONAL BENCHSTATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR-37 A, CHANDIGARHConsumer Complaint No.903 of 2018 Date of Institution : 19.11.2018Date of Decision : 22.11.2018Smt. Swaran Kaur W/o Sh. Hardeep Singh, R/o H.No.3508, Sector 35-D, Chan...
Case Number: 903
|
Date of Filing: 19-11-2018
|
Date of Upload: 03-12-2018
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate Vijay Pal, Adv.
Respondant Advocate Munish Gupta, Adv.
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,U.T., CHANDIGARHComplaint case No.:275 of 2017Date of Institution:31.03.2017Date of Decision:16.11.2018Pushpa Devi W/o Sh.Vijay Kumar, resident of House No.306, Sector 13, Hisar.……ComplainantV e r s u sM/s Omaxe Chandigar...
Case Number: 275
|
Date of Filing: 31-03-2017
|
Date of Upload: 29-11-2018
Omaxe Omaxe Chandigarh Extension Developers Private Limited
Court Name: StateCommission
Appelant Advocate In Person
Respondant Advocate
On 21.09.2018, following order was passed by this Commission:- “On 17.04.2017, following order was passed by this Commission in CC/654/2017 :-“At the time of arguments, the matter has amicably been settled between the parties. We appreciate the stand taken by both the...
Case Number: 258
|
Date of Filing: 24-08-2018
|
Date of Upload: 29-11-2018
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.
Question : Am I eligible to file case against Omaxe in Consumer Forum?
Answer : If you have purchased a product or avails any service, either for your personal use or to earn your livelihood by means of self-employment.
Question : When I can fill a complaint against Omaxe ?
Answer : A complaint may be made against Omaxe under the following circumstances:
1 : Loss or damage is caused to the consumer due to unfair or restrictive trade practice.
2 : the article purchased by you is defective.
3 : the services availed of by you suffer from any deficiency.
4 : charged more then MRP
5 : Goods or services, which will be hazardous to life and safety, when used, are being offered for sale to the public.
Question : Is there any exemption from payment of Court Fee?
Answer : The complainants who are Below the Poverty Line shall be entitled for the exemption of payment of fee for complaints upto rupees one lakh on production of an attested copy of the Antyodaya Anna Yojana card.
Question : What are the Reliefs available to Consumers?
Answer : The reliefs available are :
1 : Removal of defects from the goods
2 : Replacement of the goods
3 : Refund of the price paid.
4 : Removal of defects or deficiencies in the services
5 : Award of compensation for the loss or injury suffered;
6 : Discontinue and not to repeat unfair trade practice or restrictive trade practice;
7 : To withdraw hazardous goods from being offered for sale;
8 : To cease manufacture of hazardous goods and desist from offering services which are hazardous in nature;
9 : If the loss or injury has been suffered by a large number of consumers who are not identifiable conveniently, to pay such sum (not less than 5% of the value of such defective goods or services provided) which shall be determined by the forum;
10 : To issue corrective advertisement to neutralize the effect of misleading advertisement;
11 : To provide adequate costs to parties.