ORAL

State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission

U.P. Lucknow.

Appeal No. 1671 of 2003

Meerut Development Authority, Meerut

through its Secretary.                                            ...Appellant.

Versus

Smt. Alka Agarwal w/o Sri Inder Kumar Agarwal,

R/o M.H. 26, Pallav Puram Phase-II, Meerut. …Respondent.

Present:-

1- Hon’ble Sri Sushil Kumar, Presiding Member.

2- Hon’ble Sri Vikas Saxena, Member.

Sri Piyush Kumar Tripathi, Advocate for the appellant.

Sri V.S. Bisaria, Advocate for the respondent.

Date 20.12.2021

JUDGMENT

Per Sri Sushil Kumar,  Member- This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 31.5.2003 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Meerut in complaint case no.675 of 1994, Smt. Alka Agarwal vs. Meerut Development Authority, whereby the complaint was allowed and the authority was prohibited to recover the enhanced amount of Rs.61,000.00 from the complainant.

          As per allegation of the complaint, the complainant was applied for a plot in Pallavpuram Housing Scheme, Meerut estimated cost of the plot was fixed Rs.3,46,000.00 under self-finance scheme. The complainant deposited whole amount but the authority vide its letter dated 8.6.1994 enhanced the value of the plot and the complainant was required to pay additional Rs.61,000.00, aggrieved with this demand letter, the complainant filed a complaint before the ld. District Forum, Meerut.

The appellant/authority filed its written statement and stated that only estimated cost of the property was fixed. Final price of the property came to the tune of Rs.4,07,000.00, so the complainant was required to pay Rs.61,000.00 as the difference in the cost.

(2)

Upon hearing the parties and considering the evidence, the District Forum passed the above mentioned judgment and order.

The Meerut Development Authority filed the instant appeal on the ground that the ld. District Forum has committed error of law while passing the impugned judgment. The complainant was told the estimated cost only, final cost was determined later on.  Therefore, the complainant is bound to pay the enhanced amount under the provision of law.

We have heard the ld. Counsel appearing for both the parties and perused the impugned judgment.

On perusal of record, this fact reveals that the complainant purchased a plot under the self finance scheme and deposited whole amount. Question of accelerated amount arises only where there is a construction on the plot because value of construction and cost of construction material may alter from time to time but there is no occasion to alter the cost of the plot land unless the Meerut Development Authority is compelled to pay enhanced compensation amount to the farmers whose land were acquired by Meerut Development Authority. Had it been a case of enhanced payment of compensation by Meerut Development Authority then there was occasion to increase the cost of the plot land. But since the Meerut Development Authority has not established such nature of the case, therefore, Meerut Development Authority is not authorized to recover the enhanced amount as judged and directed by the Ld. District Forum, Meerut.     

ORDER

          Appeal is dismissed.

          The stenographer is requested to upload this order on the Website of this Commission today itself. 

          Certified copy of this judgment be provided to the parties as per rules. 

        (Vikas Saxena)                                (Sushil Kumar)

              Member                                  Presiding Member

(3)

Judgment dated/typed signed by us and pronounced in the open court.

Consign to record.

        (Vikas Saxena)                                (Sushil Kumar)

              Member                                  Presiding Member

Jafr, PA II

Court 2