Legal Cases Against BPTP

[rsc1980]

Hello All,

For committing cheating and fraud in allotment of flat in H Block, I have filled 03 cases against BPTP :-

1. Delhi SCDR Commission
2. Patiala House_Criminal Case
3. Competition Commission of India

All these 03 cases are progressive and now I would like to file an Writ Petition in Supreme Court to address the issue of these builders so that poor people like us get the justice.

Please let me know how many of you are interested to pursue the same (please share your contact details)

People interesting in chat or simple discussion please stay away. However for any legal issue you can raise query on this post.

Ravinder Pal Singh (Adv)
rsc1980@gmail.com
Phone number will be shared to those who will contact over the mail.

[rsc1980]

Remedies Available against Builders Cheat and Unfair Trade Practices

1) Complaint under Sec 12 or 17 read with Sec 2(r) of Consumer Protection Act

2) Send out a notice for the appointment of Independent Arbitration (as Builder`s Employee has conflict of rights) to Builder preferably a judicial member, failing to which by the Builder will give you the right to apply directly to High Court for Arbitration and to pursue for Declaration and Possession case

3) File some RTI under Sec-6 with DTP Sec-12 Faridabad (Opp District Courts) with fee of Rs50 in cash to get copy of Building Plan and Area Development Map and copy of license for developing housing colony. As a simple matter gather 20+ people hand over a Memo against Cheating Unfair Trade Practice with Deliberate and willful delay in possession to MD and Directors of Builder use these to file Information against UTP with CCI with requisite fee of Rs5000 to take cognizance under Sec 19 (1) of CCI. 07th Floor Hindustan Times Building CP Delhi

4) File a complaint with Police against Cheating and Fraud under Criminal Conspiracy with manipulation of Records (120B, 419,420,477A of IPC) and failing to register a FIR...you should pursue with 156(3) read with 200 of CrPC to get a FIR register in court

Hope this will help

[umesh.prabhakar1965@rediffmail.com]

http://realty.economictimes.indiatimes. ... d/47108824

NEW DELHI : The Competition Commission of India has rejected charges of use of dominant position by real estate firm BPTP in relation to the sale of a residential unit in Faridabad in Haryana.

The complainant Ravinder Pal Singh alleged the use of dominant position by the realty player. Singh alleged that he had booked an 'expandable flat' but the flat delivered to him by the company was not expandable. He also alleged that BPTP had failed to get necessary approvals to use or allot the land.

The commission said in its order that "(BPTP Ltd) does not appear to be a dominant player. In the relevant market of 'services for development and sale of residential apartments in Faridabad', there seem to be many real estate developers".

The CCI has relied on its judgments passed in 2010 and 2013 against BPTP in relation to cases of residential units in the same project in Faridabad of the builder. CCI had assessed the dominance of the real estate player then and had ruled that the company was not in a dominant position.

"Since no change in circumstances seems to have occurred since then, the Commission is of the view that, prima facie, OP (BPTP Ltd) is not dominant in the relevant market determined above" the CCI noted.

Singh said in the complaint that he had booked a 250 yards 'expandable flat' in 2009 in the Park Elite Floor Project of the builder in 2009 by paying the earnest money, brokerage and other administrative charges. He later found that BPTP had failed to get clearances to use/allot the land. When he enquired from the builder about it, he was told by BPTP that due to some technical reasons the clearances could not be secured. In 2010, he was also made a sign Builder-Buyer agreement, along with affidavit and undertaking under the threat of forfeiting the entire amount that he had paid. The agreement was one-sided and entirely favoured BPTP, he alleged.

Singh also alleged that he had to pay a higher amount than what was mentioned in the advertisement of the project and the agreement.

Even the fact that the flat delivered was not expandable was accepted by the builder only when Singh filed a case in the Dispute Redressal Commission in New Delhi, he alleged in the complaint.

[Ajeet kumar]

I am looking for a team who can take legal action against bptp

[Ajeet kumar]

I am looking for a team who can take legal action against bptp

[anirav]

mittal3066@yahoo.com, Rajiv mittal. He is leading a big group in Gurgaon against BPTP