Chandigarh

DF-II

CC/615/2016

Pritam Chand Dogra - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chandigarh Housing Board - Opp.Party(s)

Gautam Diwan Adv. & Sonia Diwan Adv. & Deepak K.Bartia Adv.

09 Jun 2017

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II,

 U.T. CHANDIGARH

======

Consumer Complaint  No	:	615 of 2016
Date  of  Institution	:	19.08.2016
Date   of   Decision	:	09.06.2017

 

 

 

 

Pritam Chand Dogra s/o Sh.Roshan Lal, aged about 42 years, R/o House No.1039, Housing Board Colony, Dhanas, UT, Chandigarh.

             …..Complainant

Versus

1]  Chandigarh Housing Board, Sector 9, Chandigarh through its Chairman.

2]  Account Officer, Chandigarh Housing Board, Sector 9, Chandigarh

                               ….. Opposite Parties

 

BEFORE:  MRS.PRITI MALHOTRA    PRESIDING MEMBER

                                SH.RAVINDER SINGH              MEMBER 

 

Argued by: Sh.Gautam Diwan, Counsel for complainant

 Sh.Rajiv Sharma, Counsel for the OPs.

 

 

PER RAVINDER SINGH, MEMBER

 

 

          Briefly stated, the complainant has claimed ownership of H.No.944, Housing Board Colony, Dhanas, Chandigarh by way of unregistered Will dated 17.8.2012 of Ajaib Singh. It is averred that the House No.944, Housing Board Colony, Dhanas, Chandigarh was earlier allotted by Chandigarh Housing Board in the name of Jit Singh vide letter dated 23.7.1981 (Ann.C-1), who executed a registered Will on 21.12.1981 registered in January, 1982 (Ann.C-2) in favour of Sh.Ravinder Singh in respect of said dwelling unit. Subsequently, after execution of Will, Jit Singh died on 5.6.2005 (Ann.C-6). It is also averred that Sh.Ravinder Singh (bachelor) also further executed a registered will dated 18.8.2006 in favour of Sh.Ajaib Singh (his real brother) to whom he had bequeathed his rights/title/interest of the said dwelling unit and subsequently, Ravinder Singh expired on 5.9.2006 (Ann.C-3). 

         Ajaib Singh, being beneficiary of Will filed Civil Suit No.1631, dated 10.8.2007 for declaration, which was decided exparte vide judgment and decree dated 24.2.2012 whereby Ajaib Singh was declared the owner of said dwelling unit (Ann.C-4).  It is averred that Ajaib Singh being old age and infirm could not get the said property transferred in his name after getting the decree in his favour and before applying for transfer, he executed an unregistered Will in favour of the complainant on 17.8.2012 duly witnessed by his son Harjit Singh.  However, Ajaib Singh died on 6.1.2013.  It is also averred that on the basis of unregistered Will left by deceased Ajaib Singh, the complainant applied for transfer of title of the said dwelling unit in his name and also sent reminders to the OPs. It is pleaded that the complainant duly complied with all the objections raised by the OPs and submitted the required documents and fee of Rs.200/- for transfer of the dwelling unit on the basis of unregistered Will.  It is also pleaded that the OPs themselves got published the public notice with regard to transfer of the said property in the name of complainant in three newspapers – Punjab Kesri (Hindi), Yogmarg (English) and Punjabi Tribune (Punjabi) and charged Rs.10,000/- from the complainant for said publication (Ann.C-12 & C-13 colly), but still the unit has not been transferred in the name of complainant.  It is further pleaded that the OPs vide letter dated 12.5.2016 (Ann.C-14) directed the complainant to obtain the probate certificate from Competent Court, though no reason has been given for such demand nor any such order has been supplied. It is submitted that the Opposite Parties have deliberately and intentionally violated the specific order of the Hon’ble High Court passed in case titled as Kamal Kumar vs. Chandigarh Administration and Anr., and also violated their own specific notification, as such, the OPs have deliberately delayed the process of transfer of dwelling unit in question in the name of the complainant, as such the OPs are deficient in their services (Ann.C-17 & C-18).  Hence, this complaint has been filed alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

 

2]       The OPs have filed joint reply and admitted that the complainant is claiming himself beneficiary of Unregistered Will dated 17.8.2012 and seek transfer of House No.944 of HBC Dhanas in his favour.  It is stated that one Joginder Pal had filed a complaint against the complainant on 8.9.2016, which whereby raise suspicion about transfer and documents submitted by the complainant and asking the OPs to carefully examine and verify the same.  It is also stated that Joginder Pal also submitted a photocopy dated 13.5.1997 where an amount of Rs.9000/- were given by him to the allottee Sh.Ravinder Singh in the presence of Sh.Ajaib Singh and also submitted a photocopy of receipt of Rs.2500/- deposited by him in Punjab National Bank for EMI and ground rent in respect of D.U.No.944, Housing Board Colony, Dhanas (Ann.R-1 & R-2). It is submitted that case of the complainant for transfer of the dwelling unit in question on the basis of unregistered Will was considered and complainant was directed to get the probate.  It is also submitted that the Board’s transfer policy in respect of transfer on un-registered Will basis has since been amended and now such beneficiary (out of family) is required to get the Will probate from the competent court of law.  Pleading no deficiency in service and denying rest of the allegations, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint.

 

3]       Rejoinder has also been filed by the complainant thereby reiterating the assertions as made in the complaint and controverting that of the reply filed by OPs.

 

4]       Parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

 

5]       We have heard the ld.Counsel for the parties and have also carefully perused the entire evidence on record.

 

6]       The Dwelling Unit No.944 in Village Dhanas, UT, Chandigarh was allotted to Jit Singh vide allotment letter dated 23.7.1981 by Chandigarh Housing Board and the property in question still stands in his name in the record of rights.  

 

7]       The complainant Pritam Chand Dogra has been claiming ownership right on the basis of an unregistered Will executed by Ajaib Singh.  Three Wills i.e. :- Dated 21.12.1981 executed by Jit Singh in favour of Ravinder Singh, Dated 18.8.2006 executed by Ravinder Singh in favour of Ajaib Singh,  Dated 17.8.2012 executed by Ajaib Singh in favour of Pritam Chand Dogra, have come on record, but none of it has gone through judicial scrutiny except exparte decree dated 24.2.2012 obtained by Ajaib Singh.

 

8]       The substantial question of facts and law regarding vesting of legal valid title of ownership in the name of Pritam Chand Dogra, over the property in question, which was originally allotted to Jit Singh, can only be adjudicated by a Civil Court.  The Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum lacks power within the ambit of The Consumer Protection Act to ponder over and adjudicate question of title of ownership over the property. 

 

9]       Keeping into consideration the facts under consideration, the complaint is hereby dismissed for want of jurisdiction before this Forum.  No order as to costs.

        Certified copy of this order be communicated to the parties, free of charge. After compliance file be consigned to record room.

Announced

9^th June, 2017              

                                                                                                Sd/-

                                                                  

 (PRITI MALHOTRA)

PRESIDING MEMBER

 

 

Sd/-

(RAVINDER SINGH)

MEMBER