MS LAKSHMAN SINGH YADAV AND SONS HUF AND ORS vs LANDMARK APARTMENTS PVT. LTD.

The respondent vide its application for dismissal of complaint has submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable and barred by the principle of res-judicata, Order 2 Rule 2, CPC and also under the law of limitation as the complainant has previously filed a complaint bearing no. 952 of 2018 seeking assured return as per the MoU alongwith incidental relief and the Authority has already decided the said complaint vide order dated 31.01.2019. Therefore, a subsequent complaint is not maintainable before this Authority under the above-said provisions. The counsel for the complainant vide reply to the dismissal application has submitted that the relief sought in both the complaints are entirely different and have no lines overlapping. Further the relief sought in the former complaint has been a contractual relief which has been claimed on the basis of MoU entered between the parties, whereas the relief claimed in the instant complaint is a statutory relief evolving from the Act and rules. Moreover, the former complaint was not decided on merits rather the Authority has directed the parties to settle the issue of assured return, amicably outside the Authority. Heard.  Certain pertinent question have been raised by the parties in the matter w.r.t   the issue of res judicata and fresh cause of action arising after the passing of the order dated 31.01.2019 and rectification dated 25.08.2022.  Matter may be placed before the full bench on 11.02.2025 for further proceedings.

Vide proceedings dated 13.03.2024, the complainant was directed to respond to the application for dismissal filed by the respondent. Accordingly, the complainant has filed reply to the said application. The proxy counsel for the complainant requests for a short adjournment as the main counsel is not available today. Request is allowed. Matter to come up on 20.11.2024 for further proceedings.

Vide proceedings dated 13.03.2024, the complainant was directed to respond to the application for dismissal filed by the respondent. Accordingly, the complainant has filed reply to the said application. The respondent vide its application for dismissal of complaint has submitted that the present complaint is not maintainable and barred by the principle of res-judicata, Order 2 Rule 2 CPC and also under the law of limitation as the complainant has previously filed a complaint bearing no. 952 of 2018 seeking assured return as per the MoU alongwith incidental relief and the Authority has already decided the said complaint vide order dated 31.01.2019. Therefore, a subsequent complaint is not maintainable before this Authority under the above-said provisions. The counsel for the complainant vide reply to the dismissal application has submitted that the relief sought in both the complaints are entirely different and have no lines overlapping. Further the relief sought in the former complaint has been a contractual relief which has been claimed on the basis of MoU entered between the parties, whereas the relief claimed in the instant complaint is a statutory relief evolving from the Act and rules. Moreover, the former complaint was not decided on merits rather the Authority has directed the parties to settle the issue of assured return, amicably outside the Authority. The counsel for the respondent seeks an adjournment to argue the matter  as he has obtained a copy of reply today itself. Matter to come up on 04.09.2024 for further proceedings.

The counsel for the respondent has filed an application for dismissal of the complaint. On the last date of hearing, the counsel for the complainant was directed to file a reply to the said application. However, no reply has been filed by the complainant till date. None present on behalf of the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted to the complainant to respond to the application for dismissal. Matter to come up  on 3.7.2024 for further proceedings.

Reply not filed on behalf of respondent. Application for dismissal of complaint filed by the respondent in the registry taken on record. Now come upon 13.03.2024 for filing reply of said application.

The present complaint was filed on 15.03.2023 and registered as complaint No. 1002 of 2023. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint along with annexures made to the respondent has been submitted by the complainant as available in the file.  The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post.  Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at following email address: [email protected], [email protected]. It is a proper service of the notice. Written reply has not been filed by the respondent. None present on  behalf of the respondent.  Respondent is directed to file a reply within two weeks in the registry with a copy to the complainant. Last opportunity is being granted. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defence of the respondent shall be  struck of.            The matter to come up on 21.2.2024  for further proceedings.

The present complaint was filed on 15.03.2023 and registered as complaint No. 1002 of 2023. As per the registry, complainant has sent copy of complaint along with annexures through speed post as well as through email and proof regarding having the delivery of the complaint along with annexures made to the respondent has been submitted by the complainant as available in the file.  The registry of the authority sent a notice with a copy of the complaint along with annexures through speed post as per the tracking report of the speed post available in the file.  Registry has also sent the notice along with a copy of the complaint through email at email address.  No written reply has been filed by the respondents till date. The counsel for the respondent requests for a short adjournment for filing of reply.  The respondent is directed to file reply in the registry of the Authority within two weeks i.e., by 23.08.2023, with an advance copy to the complainant. In case reply is not filed within the time allowed, the defence of the respondent may struck of. Counsel for the respondent states that the same matter has already been decided by the authority vide CR No.952 of 2018 on 31.1.2019  and they shall be moving an application for not maintainability of the complaint.  He is hereby given the liberty and directed to file the reply in three  weeks after supplying a copy to the complainant. Matter to come up on 22.11.2023 for further proceedings.