SINDHU vs RUDRA SEVEN BUILDCON
Party Details
- SINDHU
- RUDRA SEVEN BUILDCON
Case Summary
SINDHU filed Case No. CC/250/2015 in the Consumer Court on 10 Apr 2015 against RUDRA SEVEN BUILDCON. The case has undergone 2 hearings over 14 days. The case is currently pending. 2 orders have been issued in this matter.
Hearing History (2)
- 26MAY 2015Hearing
Judge: N/A
Stage: DISPOSED OFF
- 12MAY 2015Hearing
Judge: N/A
Stage: REGISTERED
Orders (2)
- 26MAY 2015judgement
Order No: N/A
- 12MAY 2015order
Order No: N/A
Judgement Details
Daily Order Daily order CDRF.EAST Complaint Case No.
CC/250/2015 SINDHU Vs.
RUDRA SEVEN BUILDCON BEFORE: HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE N.A.
ZAIDI PRESIDENT HON'BLE MR.
SUBHASH GUPTA MEMBER HON'BLE MRS.
POONAM MALHOTRA MEMBER For the Complainant: For the Opp.
Party: Dated : 26 May 2015 ORDER We have heard the Ld.
Cl. for the complainant on the point of admission; the Ld.
Cl. was askid to satisfy this Forum as to how this complaint is maintainable before the Consumer Forum and that to in Delhi Consumer Court as the matter relates to city Haridwar and a project in Mathura, both out of Jurisdiction of this Forum.
The corporate office of the respondent company located at A-83 First Floor Sector 63 NOIDA, U.P.
India.
The Ld.
Cl. argued that the registered office of this company located within the Territorial Jurisdiction of this Forum as such this Forum shall have the jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint, this has been judicially now settled that merely location of registered office will not suffice in closing the Forum for the Jurisdiction but as to be seen what cause of action has arisen within the Territorial Jurisdiction of the Forum.
The agreement executed between the parties was executed at NOIDA all the receipts regarding payment made by the complainant were also issued by the respondent from their NOIDA office.
There is not an iota of evidence which can show that any cause of action within the Territorial Jurisdiction of NCT Delhi.
Further, the complainant has failed along with the complaint as a proof of filling of FIR against the respondent company u/s 420, 468, 471, IPC.
The allegations in the complaint in Para-9, crime No.19/2014 and various section of IPD were registered against the respondents.
They have made repeated averments cheating which is not within the domain of the Consumer Forum.
The fact of cheating can only be taken care by the appropriate authority on the criminal side. inal side.
It is well established law that all fact which requires evidence cross examined and reexamination cannot be tired before the Consumer Forum.
We don’t find it to be a fit case to be admitted for hearing before this Forum.
The complaint is returned back to the complainant for presentation for the proper Forum and Jurisdiction in this matter, if so advised. [HON'BLE MR.
ZAIDI] PRESIDENT [HON'BLE MR.
SUBHASH GUPTA] MEMBER [HON'BLE MRS.
POONAM MALHOTRA] MEMBER