Haryana

StateCommission

A/798/2015

HUDA - Complainant(s)

Versus

AMRIK SINGH - Opp.Party(s)

B.S.NEGI

18 Dec 2015

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION HARYANA, PANCHKULA

                                                 

First Appeal No  :      798 of 2015

Date of Institution:      21.09.2015

Date of Decision :       18.12.2015

 

1.     The Haryana Urban Development Authority, Panchkula through its Chief Administrator, Sector-6, Panchkula.

 

2.     The Administrator, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Sector-6, Panchkula.

 

3.     The Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Sector-6, Panchkula. 

                                      Appellants/Opposite Parties

Versus

1.      Amrik Singh,

2.      Gurmukh Singh

3.      Gurnam Singh,

Sons of late Shri Sucha Singh, Resident of Village Jai Singhpura, Tehsil and District Panchkula.

                                      Respondents/Complainants

 

CORAM:             Hon’ble Mr. Justice Nawab Singh, President.

                             Shri B.M. Bedi, Judicial Member.

                             Shri Diwan Singh Chauhan, Member                                                                                                                                         

Present:               Shri B.S. Negi, Advocate for appellants.

                             Shri D.K. Singal, Advocate for respondents.

 

                                                   O R D E R

 

B.M. BEDI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

 

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 15^th April, 2015, passed by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula (for short ‘the District Forum’) in Execution Application No.13 of 2014 arising out of the order dated 4^th September, 2007, in Consumer Complaint No.42 of 2007.

2.      Amrik Singh and others-Complainants/respondents, filed complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, averring that they were owners of land measuring 2 Kanals 17 Marlas bearing Khewat No.182, Khatoni No.219 situated in Village Singhpura, Tehsil and District Panchkula. The above said land was acquired by Government of Haryana in the year 1992 for development of Sector-27, Panchkula. The complainants applied for allotment of ten marlas plot on 16.02.1996, under the Oustees Policy framed by Haryana Urban Development Authority (for short ‘the HUDA’). The opposite parties floated a scheme which commenced from 03.08.2001 and closed on 03.09.2001. The complainants again applied for allotment of 10 marlas plot under the said scheme. On being asked by the opposite parties, the complainants deposited 10% amount of the tentative price of the plot on 01.10.2001, however plot was not allotted and application of the complainants was rejected stating that the complainants were not entitled for plot under the oustees policy. The complainants alleged it as deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and by filing complaint sought direction to allot a plot of ten marlas.

3.      The Opposite Parties in their reply stated that the complainants had not submitted the documents required for allotment of plot in the year 2001 and they deposited the amount without direction of the opposite parties. The names of the complainants were not included in the list of oustees for not complying with the instructions of HUDA. Denying the averments made in the complaint, it was prayed that the complaint be dismissed.

4.      On appraisal of the pleadings and evidence of the parties, the District Forum vide order date 04.09.2007 allowed complaint and directed the opposite parties as under:-

“a)     To allot a 10 marla plot in Sector 27, Panchkula in the name of the complainants  on the price initially fixed by the Ops which is Rs.3395/- per sq. meter while floating scheme for allotment of residential plots of the said sector in the year 2001; and

b)      Also to pay a sum of Rs.2000/- as costs of proceedings.”

5.      The Opposite Parties/HUDA, filed First Appeal No.954 of 2008 before this Commission which was dismissed vide order dated 15^th November, 2011.

6.      Revision Petition No.1308 of 2012 filed by Opposite Parties/HUDA, was decided by Hon’ble National Commission vide order dated 23.10.2013 observing as under:-

                   “16.   In view of this, we accept the revision petition.

17.    Respondents/complainants have already got the plot, no dispute survives. In case the complainants/respondents in the capacity of oustees have another grouse, they can approach the appropriate forum except the consumer forum. We are of the view that the oustees are not the consumers.”

 7.     Opposite Parties/HUDA not handing over possession despite allotment of plot, the complainants/respondents filed execution application. HUDA filed objections raising plea that since the oustees/complainants are not consumers, therefore, the complaint was not maintainable.

8.      Objection Petition was dismissed vide impugned order dated 15.04.2015 and directed the HUDA to allot plot again which was cancelled by HUDA.  Hence, the instant appeal.

9.      Learned counsel for the HUDA has argued that since the complainants do not fall under the definition of consumers in view of the judgment rendered by Hon’ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.1308 of 2012, therefore, HUDA was justified in cancelling the plot and not handing over possession.

10.    The contention raised is not tenable. Since the order already stood executed, besides the order stood complied before filing of revision and revision was disposed of with the observation that on allotment of plot, no dispute survives, therefore, the District Forum rightly dismissed the objection petition.  Not only that, number of oustees had filed complaints, which were allowed and have been allotted plots and orders have been implemented. In none of those cases the allotment has been cancelled as is being done by the HUDA in this case for reasons not explained.

11.    In view of the above, no ground for interference in the impugned order is made out. Hence, the appeal is dismissed.

 

 

Announced 18.12.2015

Diwan Singh Chauhan Member

B.M. Bedi Judicial Member

Nawab Singh President

CL