BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL ________________________

Consumer Complaint No. _______

__________________________________... ComplainantVersus____________________________________ Opposite Parties

WRITTEN ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -1.That the complaint filed on behalf of the complainant may kindly be read as part of these arguments. 2.That the following facts are the sufficient grounds for the allowing the present complaint:i) That the complainant approached the OP to buy the residential flat, C-1 containing the detail of the project and cost of flat. The complainant opted for purchase of a two bedroom flat having super area 2000 Sq. ft for which he filled the Application form No., C-2 for Registration for allotment of residential flats as required by the opposite party on dated 16.03.2011 and made the initial deposit Rs. 6,00,000/- vide demand draft No. ______/SBI Dated ________. The demand draft and the receipt are C-3 & C-4, which was accepted vide an acceptance cum demand letter dated ________, C-5. ii) That the complainant came to know that some litigation is going on regarding construction of above mentioned project the opposite party in the month of May 2011 as the requisite permission and approval from the concerned authorities were not obtained by the OP. So the complainant approached the OP for refund of earnest money vide letters dated ______________________________but in place of refunding the amount the OP continuously issued letters of demand on ________________________. Copies above mentioned letters are C-6 to C-12. iii) That even otherwise aslso, there is a defeciency in service on behalf of the OPs because as per clause 11 of the terms and condition of allotment in acceptance letter, annexure C-2, the OP was required to give possession of the flat in question within three years from the date of acceptance dated ____________, C-2 which has already been elapsed on ________________. Moreover, as per the booklet, C-1, at top of __________ of the complaint, the possession was to be delived within three years, but they failed to hand over the possession of the flat till date.3.That the facts detailed above would clearly show that there is negligence and deficiency in the services of opposite parties and it also caused mental torture, harassment and agony to the complainant as the OP has failed to refund the advance of Rs. 8,00,000/- paid by the complainant as initial deposit.4.That in the facts and circumstances of the case, the complainant is entitled to the relief as a case of defeciency and delay in delivery of possession is made out in favour of the complainant and the same deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice with costs.It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this complaint, may kindly be allowed with costs.

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint No. _______ of 2014

Rajinder kumar Chauhan son of Shri Kadsu Ram r/o Flat No. 640, Sector 48-A, Sarvhitkari Co-op Society, Chandigarh... ComplainantVersusShalimar Estates (P) Ltd. through its Director, SCO No. 110-111, IInd Floor, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh Opposite Parties Affidavit of Rajinder kumar Chauhan son of Shri Kadsu Ram r/o Flat No. 640, Sector 48-A, Sarvhitkari Co-op Society, Chandigarh

I, the above named deponent, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as under:- iv) That the complainant is residing in Chandigarh at the address given in the head note of the complaint as such he is competent to file the present complaint before this Honble forum.v) That the complainant wanted to own a residential flat in or around Chandigarh as such he came to know that the OP was constructing residential flats at the locality in the name and style of Shalimar Complex at Abadi Area, Sarangpur (U.T) Chandigarh. vi) That the complainant approached the OP to buy the residential flat and purchased a booklet containing the detail of the project and cost of flat. The brochure is annexed as Annexure C-1.vii) That the complainant opted for purchase of a two bedroom flat having super area 900 Sq. Ft. viii) That the complainant filled the Application form No. 20376 for Registration for allotment of residential flats as required by the opposite party on dated 16.03.2011. The copy of the above mentioned form is annexed as Annexure C-2.ix) That the complainant made the initial deposit Rs. 3,00,000/- along with the application form vide demand draft No. 525086/S.B.O.P Dated 16.03.2011. Copy of the demand draft and the receipt issued by the opposite party are annexed as Annexure C-3 & C-4.x) That the opposite party issued an acceptance cum demand letter dated 18.03.2011. The copy of the above mentioned form is annexed as Annexure C-5. xi) That the complainant came to know that some litigation is going on regarding construction of above mentioned project the opposite party in the month of May 2011 as the requisite permission and approval from the concerned authorities were not obtained by the OP. So the complainant approached the OP for refund of earnest money vide letters dated 07.06.2011,18.06.2011, 28.09.2011, 15.11.2011 & 27.09.2012 but in place of refunding the amount the OP continuously issued letters of demand on 25.05.2011 & 11.06.2011.The copies above mentioned letters are annexed as Annexure C-6 to C-12. xii) That the OP has not been refunding the amount with interest as demanded by the complainant.xiii) That the facts detailed above would clearly show that there is negligence and deficiency in the services of opposite parties and it also caused mental torture, harassment and agony to the complainant as the OP has failed to satisfy the complainant regarding the status of the project and necessary approval from the authorities or refund the advance of Rs. 3,00,000/- paid by the complainant as initial depositxiv) That this Honble Forum has the jurisdiction to try and adjudicate the present complaint as the opposite party has its office is at Chandigarh, hence this Honble Forum has the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint.

CHANDIGARH DeponentDATED: 02.03.2015VERIFICATION:-Verified that the contents of above affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there in.

CHANDIGARH DATED: 02.03.2015 Deponent

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint No. _______ of 2015Rajinder kumar Chauhan ... ComplainantVersusShalimar Estates (P) Ltd. through its Director, Opposite PartiesApplication for placing on record fresh Address of opposite party.RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -1. That above mentioned complaint is pending before this Honble forum and fixed for 02.06.2015.2. That the Honble forum has directed the complainant to supply fresh address of the opposite party which is as under.Shalimar EstateShalimar Mega MallSite No. 5, Sector 5Punchkula (Haryana)

3. That it is in the interest of justice that the applicant is allowed to place on record the fresh address of OP.It is therefore respectfully prayed that the applicant may be allowed to place on record the fresh address of OP.

Dated:01.05.2015 (KAMAL.K.SHARMA)(GURMUKH SINGH)ADVOCATES Counsel for the Complainant

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, CHANDIGARH

Consumer Complaint No. _______ of 2014

Rajinder kumar Chauhan son of Shri Kadsu Ram r/o Flat No. 640, Sector 48-A, Sarvhitkari Co-op Society, Chandigarh... ComplainantVersusShalimar Estates (P) Ltd. through its Director, SCO No. 110-111, IInd Floor, Sector 8-C, Chandigarh Opposite PartiesComplaint u/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, as amended upto date.

RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -1. That the complainant is residing in Chandigarh at the address given in the head note of the complaint as such he is competent to file the present complaint before this Honble forum.2. That the complainant wanted to own a residential flat in or around Chandigarh as such he came to know that the OP was constructing residential flats at the locality in the name and style of Shalimar Complex at Abadi Area, Sarangpur (U.T) Chandigarh. 3. That the complainant approached the OP to buy the residential flat and purchased a booklet containing the detail of the project and cost of flat. The brochure is annexed as Annexure C-1.4. That the complainant opted for purchase of a two bedroom flat having super area 900 Sq. Ft. 5. That the complainant filled the Application form No. 20376 for Registration for allotment of residential flats as required by the opposite party on dated 16.03.2011. The copy of the above mentioned form is annexed as Annexure C-2.6. That the complainant made the initial deposit Rs. 3,00,000/- along with the application form vide demand draft No. 525086/S.B.O.P Dated 16.03.2011. Copy of the demand draft and the receipt issued by the opposite party are annexed as Annexure C-3 & C-4.7. That the opposite party issued an acceptance cum demand letter dated 18.03.2011. The copy of the above mentioned form is annexed as Annexure C-5. 8. That the complainant came to know that some litigation is going on regarding construction of above mentioned project the opposite party in the month of May 2011 as the requisite permission and approval from the concerned authorities were not obtained by the OP. So the complainant approached the OP for refund of earnest money vide letters dated 07.06.2011,18.06.2011, 28.09.2011, 15.11.2011 & 27.09.2012 but in place of refunding the amount the OP continuously issued letters of demand on 25.05.2011 & 11.06.2011.The copies above mentioned letters are annexed as Annexure C-6 to C-12. 9. That the OP has not been refunding the amount with interest as demanded by the complainant.10. That the facts detailed above would clearly show that there is negligence and deficiency in the services of opposite parties and it also caused mental torture, harassment and agony to the complainant as the OP has failed to satisfy the complainant regarding the status of the project and necessary approval from the authorities or refund the advance of Rs. 3,00,000/- paid by the complainant as initial deposit11. That this Honble Forum has the jurisdiction to try and adjudicate the present complaint as the opposite party has its office is at Chandigarh, hence this Honble Forum has the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present complaint.It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that the Opposite Parties may kindly be directed to refund a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- paid by the complainant as initial deposit and a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation on account of mental harassment and torture and agony to the complainant along with 24% p.a. interest.Any other relief which this Honble Forum may deem fit, be passed in favour of complainant against the Opposite Parties.

CHANDIGARH ComplainantDated: 16.02.2015

THROUGH

(KAMAL.K.SHARMA)(GURMUKH SINGH)ADVOCATES Counsel for the Complainant

VERIFICATION:-Verified that the contents of above complaint are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. No part of it is false and nothing material has been concealed there in. Verified at Chandigarh on this 02th day of March, 2015.

Complainant