Development Act - Judgment Search Results

M/S. Sagar Shopping Developers Acting Through Its Partner Vs. Anil Dat ...

Court: National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC

Malik, Presiding Member 1. The case of the complainant/respondent, Shri Anil Dattartray Kadam is that M/s Sagar Shopping Developers, OP is a developer/builder. The OP was constructing flats in Sagar Avenue-II and the complainant paid a cheque … was no violation whatsoever of Maharashtra Ownershilp Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction Sale Management and Transfer) Act (In short, MOFA) of 1963. 6. Instead of coming to the point, the learned counsel for the petitioner

Sheelvik Agencies a Registered Partnership Firm Under the Indian Partn ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2009(3)BomCR266

cylinders and other allied products, claims that they provide service to approximately 12,000 consumers in the JuhuVile Parle Development Scheme. In the year 1995, the Petitioner took on lease plot No. 70D at JuhuVile Parle Bus Station … not vacate the premises within three days of the receipt of the said letter, the Respondent would take action for recovery on or about 22nd September 2008. The Petitioner, vide letter dated 19th September 2008, asked the

Smt. Purnima Shantilal Dedhia (Jain), Vs. the Maharashtra Housing and ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: 2007(4)ALLMR1; 2007(4)BomCR143; 2007(4)MhLj690

before scrutinizing the documents. He submitted that Under Section 93 Sub-clause 5 of S.L.A.O. did not have any authority to cancel proposal which was made by the tenants. He submitted that therefore, the Petitioners did not have … Bombay Municipal Corporation. In the meantime, tenants sent proposal to the Board Under Section 103B of the MHADA Act. The Petitioners initially sent letter to MHADA authorities and requested them to sent copy of proposal which was