Initially the appellants filed a miscellaneous application under Section 12A of the Act seeking stay of demand of extra charges and to restrain the respondent from cancelling the allotment of the apartments for number payment of the extra amount demanded.
One of the other reliefs sought for was to direct the respondent to handover possession of the apartment forthwith.
206 of 1998 passed by the MRTP Commission by which the interim relief sought for by the appellants was rejected with certain observations.
The last prayer was to inquire into the unfair trade practices adopted by the respondent and to direct the respondent to desist from such action in future.
The immediate provocation for filing the companyplaint seems to be the letter issued by the respondent Company on 18.9.1998 calling upon the appellants to pay the escalated charges by 10th October, 1998 failing which, the respondent threatened to cancel the allotment without further numberice.
Another miscellaneous application was filed sometime later purportedly under Section 12A of the Act to handover the possession of the flat.INTERLOCUTARY APPLICATION NO.5/2004 VENKATARAMA REDDI, J. This appeal by special leave is preferred against the order dated 4.9.2000 in U.T.P.E. No.
In the application companyplaint filed under Section 36A of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act for short Act , the main relief sought for was to restrain the respondent from cancelling the allotment of the apartments in D.L.F. Beverly Park, Gurgaon for number payment of the extra amount demanded from the appellants by the letter dated 2.6.1997 etc.
