M/S. Vora Land Developers Through Mr. Shailesh P. Vora, Partner Vs. Jayantilal Hirji

Decided On : Dec-16-2013

Court : National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

LAW: Section 21(b, Section 21, Section 21, Section 14 of the Act

PERSON: V.B. Gupta, Petitioner/O.P., Act,1986, Municipal, Rajendra Thakkar, J. S. Sane, 7.10.2010, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Kandivali, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, Complainant, RameshHiralal Kadam, Complainant, Complainant, Disputes Redressal Forum, ShriShailesh Vora, Near Kora Kendra, S. V. Road, Borivali, Schedule, Kandivali, Kandivali, Fora, Rubi, Fora, Fora, Fora, Fora, Apex Courtin RamrameshwariDevi, Nirmala Devi, Darshan Singh, Fora

DATE: 20.12.2011, 19.09.2002, 1966, 23.09.2002, the year 2003, 2003, Rs.10,000/-, a period of, eight weeks, eight weeks, 2010, 218 days, 19/3/2008, about two years, 19/3/2008, four years, 8/10/2001, the year 2001, two years, two years, about the year 2003, today, today, 25.9.1996, 11 years, 2010, 8.10.2011, 1966, 1966, one month, day one, 2011, 2011, 55, four decades, the last 40 years, 56, decades, 33470, 2012, 10.12.2012, Rs.50,000/-, six weeks, 31st January, 2014

ORG: State, Disputes Redressal Commission, Maharashtra, State Commission, Respondent/Complainant, Consumer Complaint, Redressal Forum, Forum)on, Builder/Developer, Consumer Forum, Stop Work Notice, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, Public Interest Litigation, Bombay High Court, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, FSI, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Highland Project, Bombay High Court, the Development Control Regulations, FSI, Consumer Forum, The Opposite Party, The Opposite Party, The Opposite Party, The Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, Consumer Forum, the State Commission, First Appeal, The State Commission, the State Commission, Consumer Forum, F.S.I., the High Court, Consumer Forum, The Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, The Opposite Party, Rs.10,62,000/-.Assuming, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, Fixed Deposit Receipt, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, Nasik, Kandivali, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Opposite Party, the Honble National Consumer, Rs.4,20,000/-, The District Forum, the Opposite Party/Builder, the State Commission, Honble National, Honble National Commission, The State Commission, œAs, the District Consumer, Redressal Forum, the District Consumer, the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,, Maharashtra Planning Act, the Maharashtra Planning, the Paper-Book)which, GREATER MUMBAI NO.CE/16535/BP(WS)/AR, Owner, the Municipal Commssion, the Maharashtra Reginal, the Planning Authority under Section 53, the State Commission, State Commission, Commission, the State Commission, State Commission, Honble Supreme Court, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., the National Commission, the National Commission, the National Commission, the National Commission under Section 21, AIR 2004, Apex Court, Court, Commission, Ors, Nos.4912, Supreme Court, ChennaiPort Trust, œFor, ShivalikVihar Sites Pvt. Ltd., Ors, Honble Supreme Court, Petitioners under Section 15, Disputes Redressal Commission, the District Forum, Commission, Commission, the Apex Court, The Honble Supreme Court, the National Commission, ShivalikVihar Sites Pvt. Ltd., Consumer Legal Aid Account, Commission

GPE: Mumbai, Mumbai, Rs.1,00,000/-, p.a., p.a., p.a., Bombay, p.a., Mumbai, Mumbai, C.T.S., Forums, Forums, p.a.

CARDINAL: 2, about 885, 8.10.2001, three, 3., one, 379, 5.5.2004, 4, 19, 3, 19, 4, Rs.10,62,000/-, 5, 6, 5., 6, 8., 9., 7, 10, one, seven, 885, four, 28, 15, three, 16, Rs.10,62,000/-, 19.3.2008, 17, 2BHK, 885, 885, 18, Rs.10,62,000/-, 600, 2BHK, 885, Rs.10,62,000/-, Rs.10,62,000/-, 11, 55, 10, 12, 13, 8.10.2001, 115, 23, 1, 092, 812, 14, two, 55, 10, 15, 16, 654, two, two, 17, 18, 904, 19, 20, 21, 4.7.2011, 22, 34016, Fifty Thousand, 24, Fifty Thousand, 25, 26, 27

FAC: the Scheme-Highland Project

PRODUCT: Rs.10,62,000/-

PERCENT: 24%, 18%, 12%, 18%, 9%

LOC: Highland Park, SomnathPunju Nerkar Vs

ORDINAL: first, second, seventh, second, second, seventh, second, seventh, second, seventh

TIME: 24/4/2010 i.e.

NORP: Rs.4,20,000/-

QUANTITY: 6 NOTICE