DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, BATHINDA CC.No.342 of 18-07-2011 Decided on 11-11-2011
Govind Ram, aged about 55 years, son of Sh. Lal Chand, Resident of House No.115, Kamla Nehru Colony, Bathinda. .......Complainant Versus
Bathinda Development Authority, Bathinda, through its Chief Administrator. Estate Officer, Bathinda Development Authority, Bathinda.
......Opposite parties
Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.
QUORUM
Smt. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member Smt. Sukhwinder Kaur, Member Present:- For the Complainant: Sh. Ashok Gupta, counsel for the complainant For Opposite parties: Sh. N.P.Singh, counsel for opposite parties
ORDER
Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President:-
1. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 as amended up-to-date (Here-in-after referred to as an 'Act'). The brief facts of the complaint are that the complainant is NRI and is owner of Plot No.15C of 500 sq. yards situated at Model Town, Phase-3, Part-2, Bathinda. The complainant has alleged that there are electric poles including transformer, installed in the middle of the plot of the complainant by the opposite parties without knowledge and consent of the complainant. The complainant requested the opposite parties many times to remove the poles, electric wires including transformer from the plot so that he may be able to construct his house. The complainant also wrote a letter on 23.06.2010 to the opposite parties. The complainant has further alleged that he is ready for raising construction of the plot and requested many times to the opposite parties to remove the electric poles, wires and transformers but the opposite parties are not taking any action. Thereafter, the complainant approached the opposite parties where the Divisional Engineer C-1 told him that road in front of the plot No.15C is incomplete and necessary steps are being taken. The opposite party No.2 issued a letter No.3067 on 28.06.2011 to the complainant, raising a demand of Rs.4,81,415/- as non-construction fee. The complainant has challenged the said letter on various grounds that the basic amenities have not been provided on the spot till date; deep trenches and pits are open in the front of the plot of the complainant which are not filled due to which construction is not possible; electric poles, wires, transformer etc are still installed in the middle of the plot No.15C so it is not possible to make the construction without removing the said poles etc; road in front of the plot has not been provided; no show cause notice was ever issued to the complainant for the construction of the plot. The complainant has further alleged that he has paid a hefty amount of Rs.16,80,000/- to the opposite parties without getting anything from them. The complainant is not bound to make the payment of non-construction charges as the poles are not removed from there. Hence, the complainant has filed the present complaint for seeking directions of this Forum to quash the notice No.3067 dated 28.06.2011 and directed the opposite parties to remove the electric poles, wires, transformer etc alongwith interest, cost and compensation. 2. Notice was issued to the opposite parties. The opposite parties after appearing before this Forum, have filed their joint written statement and pleaded that the complainant did not apply for sanction of site plan of the plot in question till dated. He has failed to complete the construction of plot within the stipulated period of three years as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter. In fact, the complainant is not a real allotee of Plot No.15, Phase-III, Model Town, Bathinda rather he is a re-allotee. The complainant purchased the said plot from one Surjit Singh S/o Sh. Pritam Singh of Bathinda who had purchased the same from PUDA in open auction dated 06.08.2003 on the basis of terms and conditions of the auction as well as allotment letter No.10801 dated 14.10.2003. The said plot was transferred in the name of the complainant vide re-allotment letter No.3162 dated 25.8.2005. The opposite parties have further pleaded that all the basic amenities i.e. road, parks, sewerage, water supply and electricity etc are provided there. The allotee-Surjit Singh or re-allotee-the complainant did not complaint to the opposite parties in last 7 years for any problem. No transformer is installed in the middle of the plot of the complainant. There are only two electric poles near the boundary of the plot in question. The opposite parties have already deposited the requisite fee with the concerned department/PSEB for shifting the said poles/transformer and they are going to remove the same very shortly after completing all the official formalities. The opposite parties issued a notice No.1737 dated 19.10.2007 to the complainant for personal hearing on 26.11.2007 but neither the complainant nor his any representative was appeared. The opposite parties issued a notice dated 28.06.2011 to the complainant and demanded the non-construction fee of Rs.4,81,415/- as per rules and policies of PUDA. The complainant has filed an affidavit to the PUDA that he will abide by the terms and conditions of the allotment letter as well as rules of the PUDA. So, he is bound to pay the non-construction fee of Rs.4,81,415/- to the opposite parties. 3. Parties have led their evidence in support of their respective pleadings. 4. Arguments heard. Record alongwith written submissions submitted by the parties perused. 5. The main allegation of the complainant is that there are electric poles including wires and transformer installed in the middle of his plot bearing No.15C, Model Town, Phase-3, Part-2, Bathinda. The complainant had requested the opposite parties many times to remove the poles, wires and transformer etc from the said plot so that he may be able to construct the house. The complainant wrote a letter on 23.06.2010 to the opposite parties. Thereafter, the complainant approached the opposite parties, the Divisional Engineer C-1 told him that the road in front of the plot No.15C is incomplete and necessary steps would be taken. The opposite party No.2 issued a letter No.3067 on 28.06.2011 to the complainant, raising a demand of Rs.4,81,415/- as non-construction fee. The complainant has challenged the said demand on various grounds that there are no basic amenities; deep trenches and pits are open in the front of the plot of the complainant which are not filled due to which construction is not possible; electric poles, wires and transformer are still installed in the middle of the plot No.15C so it is difficult to raise construction without removing these poles etc; road in front of the plot has not been provided to the complainant. The complainant has further submitted that he is not bound to make the payment of non-construction charges as the poles, wires and transformer are not removed from his plot. 6. The opposite parties have submitted that the complainant has failed to complete the construction of the plot within stipulated period of 3 years as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter. The complainant is not a real allotee of Plot No.15C rather re-allotment has been done to the complainant. The complainant has purchased the above mentioned plot from one Surjit Singh S/o Sh. Pritam Singh who had purchased the same from PUDA in open auction dated 06.08.2003 on the basis of terms and conditions of the auction as well as allotment letter No.10801 dated 14.10.2003. The said plot was transferred in the name of the complainant vide re-allotment letter No.3162 dated 25.8.2005. All the basic amenities i.e. road, parks, sewerage, water supply and electricity etc are provided in the area. The allotee-Surjit Singh or re-allotee-the complainant did not file any complaint to the opposite parties for the last 7 years for any such problem. Moreover, no transformer is installed in the middle of the said plot. There are only two electric poles near the boundary of the plot. The opposite parties have already deposited the requisite fee with the concerned department/Punjab State Power Corporation Limited for shifting the said poles/transformer and they will remove the same very shortly after completing the official formalities. The opposite parties have got issued a notice No.1737 dated 19.10.2007 to the complainant for personal hearing on 26.11.2007 but neither the complainant nor his any representative appeared. Again, a notice dated 28.06.2011 sent to the complainant and demand for non-construction fee of Rs.4,81,415/- was raised. The complainant has filed an affidavit that he will abide by the terms and conditions of the allotment letter as well as rules of the PUDA. Accordingly, he is bound to pay the non-construction fee of Rs.4,81,415/- to the opposite parties. 7. A perusal of documents placed on file reveals that the complainant had written a letter dated 23.06.2010 Ex.C-1 to the opposite parties for removal of electric poles, wire and transformer from the plot of the complainant and to provide the basic amenities. A perusal of Ex.C-2 shows that the demand notice of Rs.4,81,415/- for non-construction charges has been raised to the complainant vide letter dated 28.06.2011. Further, a perusal of photographs placed on file shows that there are poles, wires and transformer in the plot of the complainant. The original allotee has purchased the plot in question in open auction and he was bound by certain terms and conditions issued by the opposite parties in the allotment letter itself. 8. The opposite parties have submitted in their written statement that they have written to the Electricity Department i.e. PSPCL for removal of the transformer and wires from his plot which confirms that there are poles, wires and transformer in the plot of the complainant. As long as, there are poles, wires and transformer in the plot in question, the complainant cannot raise the construction in the said plot but that does not mean that the complainant should not pay non-construction fee. Moreover, the original allotee or the complainant had not made any complaint regarding poles in the said plot which clearly shows that the complainant was not himself ready for construction of the plot. If, he was so keen for the construction of the plot earlier, he should have not kept mum for the period of 7 years. He has given the application to the opposite parties for the first time on 23.06.2010. 9. Therefore, in view of what has been discussed above, it has been proved that there are poles, wires and transformer in the plot of the complainant. The complainant is entitled for the plot free from any hindrance such as electric poles, wires or transformer passing through it. Thus, there is deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties. Hence, this complaint is accepted with Rs.10,000/- as cost and compensation and the opposite parties are directed to shift the poles, wires and transformer from the plot of the complainant. Compliance of this order be done within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned for record. ' Pronounced in open Forum 11-11-2011 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni) President
(Amarjeet Paul) Member
(Sukhwinder Kaur) Member |
