NAVIN M. RAHEJA & ANR. vs DINESH GOYAL & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 31.07.2025 Judgment delivered on: 11.09.2025 + CM(M) 381/2025 & CM APPL. 11218/2025 & CM APPL. 11219/2025 NAVIN M. RAHEJA & ANR. .....Petitioners versus DINESH GOYAL & ORS. .....Respondent Memo of Appearance For the Petitioner: Mr. Yogendra Mishra with Ms. Manmeet Kaur, Mr. Rohan Anand, Ms. Aashna, Advocates For the Respondent: Mr. Arjun Mahajan with Mr. Sumit R Sharma, Mr. Raghuvendra N Budholia, Mr. Sagar Agarwal, Mr. Piyush Gautam, Mr. Nandan Malhotra, Mr. Harshit Kapoor, Mr. Aryan Verma, Ms. Bhavya Arora, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN JUDGMENT MANOJ JAIN, J 1. The present petition, filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, takes exceptions to two orders passed by Hon‟ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (in short „National Commission‟). 2. First such order is order dated 26.08.2022 whereby a batch of 35 complaints filed against M/s Raheja Developers Ltd. has been allowed. The other is order dated 03.02.2025 whereby, in execution emanating from one such complaint, certain directions have been issued to the Directors of JD Company. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL CM(M) 381/2025 Page 1 of 17 Signing Date:11.09.2025 17:23:37 3. Let me narrate the background facts, in brief. 4. Several complainants approached National Commission with complaints under Section 21 read with Section 12 (1)(a) of the Consumer Protection Act 1986 against M/s Raheja Developers Ltd. Some were seeking possession with compensation for delayed-delivery while others were seeking refund of the amount paid by them towards the sale of units in question. 5. The project in question was known as „Revanta‟ situated at Sector-78, Gurgaon, Haryana. 6. According to complainants