Haryana

StateCommission

A/1232/2016

SATISH KUMAR - Complainant(s)

Versus

SUN CITY PROJECTS PVT.LTD. - Opp.Party(s)

SURINDER GANDHI

10 Nov 2017

ORDER

 

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

HARYANA PANCHKULA

                  

                                                First Appeal No.1232 of  2016

Date of the Institution:16.12.2016

Date of Decision: 10.11.2017

 

Satish Kumar S/o Sh. Raghubir Singh, R/o Honey Sajjawat Emporium, Railway Crossing, near Shiela Cinema, Sonepat Road, Rohtak.

                                                                             .….Appellant

Versus

 

The Director, Sun City Project Pvt. Ltd., Marketing Office, Sector-34, behind Sector-3, Sonepat Road, Rohtak.

                                                .….Respondent

CORAM:    Mr.R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member

 

Present:-    Mr.Surinder Gandhi, Advocate for appellant.

                   Mr.Atul Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent.

 

O R D E R

 

R.K.BISHNOI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

As per order dated 10.11.2017 contained in letter No.2375, I am conducting these proceedings singly.

          In view of the statement made by learned counsel for appellant/complainant impugned dated 15.11.2016 passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak is set-aside and complaint No.332 of 2009  and present appeal bearing No.1232 of 2016 are dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file fresh complaint. However, in terms of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Laxmi Engineering Works Versus PSG Industries Institute (1995) 3 SCC 583, the appellant/complainant avail benefit qua limitation.

 

November 10th, 2017

R.K.Bishnoi, Judicial Member Addl.Bench

R.K.