Loading…
Loading…
Advocate · Appearances before RERA, NCLT, DRT, the High Court and the Supreme Court
3,086orders and judgmentsAll verified by Editor
Only the judgments in which Puneet Jain's actual appearance is verified from the court record and documents are listed here, and each is manually verified by the lawontips.com team.
Orders 526–550 of 3,086 · Page 22 of 124
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/79308/2021 · for the respondent
Mandamus directing the Authority to re-set the completion duration and other timme related obligations of the Respondent in relation to the Plot in question in accordance with the date of actual handing over of all land parcels forming part of the land of the Petitioner. The Weit Petition filed by the Respondent has be
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Advocate · Appearances before RERA, NCLT, DRT, the High Court and the Supreme Court
3,086orders and judgmentsAll verified by Editor
Only the judgments in which Puneet Jain's actual appearance is verified from the court record and documents are listed here, and each is manually verified by the lawontips.com team.
Orders 526–550 of 3,086 · Page 22 of 124
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/79308/2021 · for the respondent
Mandamus directing the Authority to re-set the completion duration and other timme related obligations of the Respondent in relation to the Plot in question in accordance with the date of actual handing over of all land parcels forming part of the land of the Petitioner. The Weit Petition filed by the Respondent has be
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59485/2020 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59485/2020 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59392/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59392/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0517/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: 58[?]44/08/057/209 Surbhi Agarwal Versus Logix Infrastructure [?] In the present case the file was reserved for orders on 34.2.2024, and both parties were directed to file their written arguments by 5.04.2022, but neither party filed any written arguments. Both parties
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAfter reservationVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0464/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
The present complaint application has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the complainant states that they booked Unit No. 504 in the opposite party's project Sikka Karnam Greens, for which they paid Rs.4,42,439/- from time to time i
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0464/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Present: T. Venkatesh, Member Complaint No.: [?]8[?]244/08/0464/209 Santosh Kumar Verma Versus Sikka Infrastructure Private Limited In the present case the file was reserved for orders, and both parties appeared. The arguments of both parties were heard. The file is reserved for orders. The file shows that the responde
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0383/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: [?]44/08/0383/209 Arpit Agarwal Versus Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. In this case the case file was reserved for orders on 34.2.2024, and both parties were directed to file their respective written arguments by 45.04.2024, but neither party has filed any written argum
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97435/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Present: Dr. Deepak Swaroop Saxena, Member | Serial No. | Complaint No. | Complainant | Unit No. | Amount deposited as per receipts | Date of allotment | Possession date (with 6-month grace period) | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | [?] | NCRI44/04/93049/2022[?] | Kumari Archana | N-205 | Rs. 54,24,287/ | 09.42.2045 | 3
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97143/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97136/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96922/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96870/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96863/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. — 8[?]44/07/96863/2022 Veena Dhingra and Akash Dhingra Versus Mahalakshmi Infahome Pvt. Ltd. In the present application, the complainant has filed against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the lead complainant states th
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96720/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96578/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. --NCR44/07/96578/2022 Sanjay Kalra and Bharat Bhushan Versus Mahalakshmi Infohome Pvt. Ltd. In the application filed, the complainant has instituted the complaint against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. Briefly, the lead compla
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96264/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar Status-Disposed · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96009/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/95955/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/78907/2021 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. — NCRI44/07/78907/202 Prashant Kumar Agrawal Versus Uppal [?] Hi-Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. The present complaint application has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the complainant's
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/77994/2021 · Bench 1 · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: NCR44/07/77994/202 Srikant Kumar Raut Versus La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd. In the present case, the file was reserved for orders on 37.05.2022. Thereafter, on examination of the RERA portal, the Bench has come to notice that proceedings relating to the project in
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59485/2020 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59485/2020 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59392/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/59392/2020 · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0517/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: 58[?]44/08/057/209 Surbhi Agarwal Versus Logix Infrastructure [?] In the present case the file was reserved for orders on 34.2.2024, and both parties were directed to file their written arguments by 5.04.2022, but neither party filed any written arguments. Both parties
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAfter reservationVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0464/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
The present complaint application has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the complainant states that they booked Unit No. 504 in the opposite party's project Sikka Karnam Greens, for which they paid Rs.4,42,439/- from time to time i
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0464/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Present: T. Venkatesh, Member Complaint No.: [?]8[?]244/08/0464/209 Santosh Kumar Verma Versus Sikka Infrastructure Private Limited In the present case the file was reserved for orders, and both parties appeared. The arguments of both parties were heard. The file is reserved for orders. The file shows that the responde
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/08/0383/2019 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: [?]44/08/0383/209 Arpit Agarwal Versus Logix Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. In this case the case file was reserved for orders on 34.2.2024, and both parties were directed to file their respective written arguments by 45.04.2024, but neither party has filed any written argum
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97435/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Present: Dr. Deepak Swaroop Saxena, Member | Serial No. | Complaint No. | Complainant | Unit No. | Amount deposited as per receipts | Date of allotment | Possession date (with 6-month grace period) | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | [?] | NCRI44/04/93049/2022[?] | Kumari Archana | N-205 | Rs. 54,24,287/ | 09.42.2045 | 3
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97143/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/97136/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96922/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96870/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96863/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. — 8[?]44/07/96863/2022 Veena Dhingra and Akash Dhingra Versus Mahalakshmi Infahome Pvt. Ltd. In the present application, the complainant has filed against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the lead complainant states th
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96720/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96578/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. --NCR44/07/96578/2022 Sanjay Kalra and Bharat Bhushan Versus Mahalakshmi Infohome Pvt. Ltd. In the application filed, the complainant has instituted the complaint against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. Briefly, the lead compla
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96264/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar Status-Disposed · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/96009/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/95955/2022 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
It is wrong to say that the opposite party has delayed; rather, the complainants have not paid the amount on time. It has also been stated that an offer of possession has been issued to the complainants, but since the complainants did not come, several reminder letters were sent; yet the complainants did not come to ta
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/78907/2021 · Adjudicating Officer Gautam Budh Nagar · for the complainant
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No. — NCRI44/07/78907/202 Prashant Kumar Agrawal Versus Uppal [?] Hi-Tech Developers Pvt. Ltd. The present complaint application has been filed by the complainant against the opposite party seeking possession and interest for the delayed period. In brief, the complainant's
Undated
UndatedFinal orderAppearedVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/77994/2021 · Bench 1 · for the respondent
Shri Rajeev Kumar, Hon'ble Chairman Complaint No.: NCR44/07/77994/202 Srikant Kumar Raut Versus La Residentia Developers Pvt. Ltd. In the present case, the file was reserved for orders on 37.05.2022. Thereafter, on examination of the RERA portal, the Bench has come to notice that proceedings relating to the project in
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent
Undated
UndatedFinal orderVerified
Complaint No. NCR144/07/70986/2021 · Bench 2 Gautam Budh Nagar · for the respondent