Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
NCLAT dismissed appeals seeking compensation for delayed possession and increased costs of EWS flats. Appellants claimed Rs. 42,42,000/- each, including rental damages, mental agony, interest on deposits, and litigation expenses. The tribunal held that compensation under Section 42A and 53N(1) of Competition Act is payable only for violation of CCI orders, which was not established. Despite CCI finding respondent's abuse of dominant position in the relevant geographic market, appellants' prior consent to cost enhancement barred their challenge. Claims for monthly rental of Rs. 10,000 and other damages were deemed unconvincing, particularly given the EWS qualification criteria of Rs. 25,000 annual income ceiling.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.