DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

========

Darshan Singh (deceased) son of Sh.Kaur Singh, resident of House No.121, Village Burail, UT, Chandigarh, through his legal heirs :-

1.       Jaswinder Kaur daughter of late Darshan Singh

2.       Ramandeep Kaur daughter of late Darshan Singh

3.       Kulwant Kaur daughter of late Darshan Singh

          (All residents of House No.121, Burail, UT, Chandigarh)

…..Complainants

                                      V E R S U S

1.       City Star Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., Kothi No.3289, Sector 21-D, Chandigarh, through its President.

2.       Registrar, Cooperative Societies, UT, Chandigarh, Sector 17, Chandigarh.

3.       Secretary, Chandigarh Housing Board, Plot No.8, Sector 9, Chandigarh.

……Opposite Parties

QUORUM:   P.L.AHUJA                                                  PRESIDENT

                   RAJINDER SINGH GILL                                MEMBER

                   DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA         MEMBER

Argued by: Sh.Inder Singh, Counsel for complainant.

                     Sh.S.S.Khetarpal, Counsel for OP No.1.

                     Sh.Jatinder Singh, GP for OP No.2.

                     OP No.3 exparte.

PER P.L.AHUJA, PRESIDENT

1.                Sh.Darshan Singh, complainant has filed this consumer complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, through his LRs against City Star Cooperative House Building Society Ltd. & Ors. - Opposite Parties (hereinafter called the OPs), alleging that he became a member of City Star Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., Chandigarh on 15.2.1990. Sh.Darshan Singh died on 31.10.2011. Copy of his death certificate is Annexure C-1. Sh.Darshan Singh deposited Rs.110/- towards membership fee and share money. He also deposited Rs.9200/- vide pay order No.31864 dated 29.5.1992 issued by Chandigarh State Cooperative Bank Ltd., Sector 22-B, Chandigarh along with affidavit dated 30.5.1992. Copy of the receipt for Rs.9200/- is Annexure C-2, Certificate issued by the Chandigarh State Cooperative Bank Limited, Chandigarh is Annexure C-3 and copy of the affidavit is Annexure C-4. Thereafter, the Chandigarh Housing Board, Chandigarh offered land to the City  Star  Cooperative House Building Society vide letter No.25589 dated 9.12.1997, copy of which is Annexure C-5 asking for the deposit of remaining 15% earnest money to complete 25% earnest money along with 18% interest. Sh.Darshan Singh paid Rs.34,000/- to the President of the Society in cash and he was advised to collect the receipt after a few days but no receipt has been issued till date. In April, 2010 Sh.Darshan Singh was able to procure list of members of OP No.1 as on 31.1.2010 containing the names of 863 members duly certified by the society and he was shocked to see that his name had been removed. He visited the office of OP No.1 a number of times to enquire about the reason for the removal of his name from the list of members but no reply was given.  Then Sh.Darshan Singh sent a letter dated 18.8.2010 through registered post to OP No.2 and the copy was also endorsed to OP No.1, copy of which is at Annexure C-6. On 15.3.2011 Sh.Darshan Singh received a letter from OP No.1 who asked him to bring the papers regarding his membership of the society. Sh.Darshan Singh during his visit to the office of the society repeatedly requested to show the original register but the office bearers of the society refused to show the record. It has been alleged that the name of Sh.Darshan Singh has been removed in unauthorized manner from the list of original members of the society and in place of him, his membership has been sold to another bogus member illegally by ignoring his claim.  OP No.2 has been regularly supervising the affairs of the society and has scrutinized the list of members as on 31.1.2010 and being in charge/supervising the society, it cannot escape the responsibility. It has been further contended that OP No.2 in an unauthorized manner short listed the list of eligible members again by excluding the name of complainant in connivance with OP No.1 in the process before allotment of land to the society for the construction of first phase of 92 flats/dwelling units for the members.  On 5.6.2011, the complainant served a legal notice upon OPs, copy of which is Annexure C-8. Reply received from OP No.3 is appended as Annexure C-10.  The complainant has alleged physical harassment and mental torture on account of the act of the OPs. The complainant has made a prayer for an order for including his name in the list of eligible members for the allotment of dwelling unit by OP No.1 and awarding Rs.25,000/- towards physical harassment, mental torture etc. with interest @18% p.a.

2.                OP No.1 in its written statement has pleaded that Chandigarh Administration floated a scheme called “The Chandigarh Allotment of Land to the Cooperative Societies Scheme 1991” as notified on 28.5.1991. Under that scheme the land was to be allotted at chunk basis to the Chandigarh Housing Board for its further allotment to the eligible Cooperative  House Building Societies for construction of multistoryed/dwelling units and their allotment to its eligible members. It has been averred that no land has been allotted to OP No.1 so far and as such the question of construction of any dwelling unit or its allotment to the complainant does not arise. It has been stated that Sh.Darshan Singh, deceased was a member of the society but his name could not be entered in the register of the members as the concerned register was with the Cooperative Department, UT, Chandigarh for verification. The name of Sh.Darshan Singh along with other members does figure in the proceeding book and other records maintained by the society and his name has not been removed illegally. The photocopy of the proceeding book is Annexure OP-1/A. It has been stated that OP No.1 society enrolled 950 members upto the cut-off date i.e. 31.10.1990. Out of 950 members, the Screening Committee constituted by the Cooperative Department U.T. screened only 237 members and 713 members, which also include the name of the complainant had been left out being not eligible on account of technical/clerical errors. The OP No.1 society filed one CWP No.6417/1992 in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking direction to the respondents to include the names of left out members in the list of eligible members and the Hon’ble High Court has issued notice to the respondents. It has been stated that OP No.1 society is seized of the situation for inclusion of the name of left out members in the list of eligible members and the complaint against OP No.1 is not justified/competent. Relevant extract of the list is Annexure OP-1/B.  It has been stated that the Chandigarh Administration hiked the price of land to be allotted to the Cooperative House Building Societies from Rs.750/- to Rs.2500/- per sq. yds. w.e.f. 1.2.2000 and it asked OP No.1 to deposit difference of 25% earnest money at enhanced rates for 237 members. Out of 237 members, only 92 members have paid the enhanced price and the Chandigarh Housing Board has not allotted any land even for 92 members. The amount deposited by the complainant in pursuance of the direction dated 26.5.1992 of the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No.6417/1992 to the extent of Rs.9200/- in 1992 and Rs.32,000/- has not been disputed.  It has been stated that out of this amount, a sum of Rs.39,775/- stands deposited in the account No.127 of Chandigarh Housing Board and Chandigarh Housing Board has not allotted any land for those members, who had been left out by the screening committee. List of the unscreened members which includes the name of the complainant, who deposited 10% earnest money + 15% balance earnest money with interest @18% per annum is Annexure OP-1/C.

3.                OP No.2 has simply pleaded that the Society prepared the list of members and the same had been counter signed. OP No.2 has no right to remove the complainant from the list of members. It has been averred that the Chandigarh Administration has constituted a committee to scrutinize the members, who have filed the applications for allotment of dwelling units through the society and the screening committee after examining the record has cleared 237 members being eligible for the allotment of land.

4.                OP No.3 has pleaded in its written statement that the complainant has instituted a complaint to quest for the legal rights of a deceased person but he has not placed on record any documents or declaration obtained from the competent court of law, wherein, he was declared to be the successor and the legal heir of the deceased. It has been stated that the complainant has not been able to state his status as a member of OP No.1 to claim any rights under the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961. It has been further stated that the complainant has no right to approach this Forum seeking the relief against OP No.3 and his complaint, which has been filed after a considerable delay of approximately 15 long years is barred by limitation and not maintainable.

5.                The parties led evidence in support of their contentions.

6.                None turned up for the OP No.3 on 31.1.2013 and it was proceeded exparte.

7.                We have appraised the entire evidence, written arguments submitted by the complainant and heard the arguments addressed by the learned Counsel for the complainant & OP No.1 and learned GP for OP No.2.

8.                At the outset, it is pertinent that Sh.Darshan Singh, who was a member of City Star Cooperative House Building Society Ltd., Chandigarh – OP No.1 was not alive at the time of filing of the complaint on 9.5.2012, yet the complaint was filed by him through his legal heirs indicating him as complainant. Had Sh.Darshan Singh been alive at the time of filing of the complaint and died afterwards his legal heirs could prosecute the complaint filed by him. The legal heirs of Sh.Darshan Singh could file a complaint for enforcing the rights of Sh.Darshan Singh but they filed a complaint indicating Darshan Singh as a complainant, therefore, the complaint is not maintainable in the present form.

9.                As far as the allegations regarding the removal of the name of Sh.Darshan Singh from the list of the members of City Star Cooperative House Building Society Ltd. – OP No.1 are concerned, the copy of the demand draft – Annexure C-2, Certificate – Annexure C-3 and the written statement of OP No.1 prove that Sh.Darshan Singh was a member of OP No.1 society and he deposited an amount of Rs.9200/- in 1992. As per case of the legal heirs of the complainant, Sh.Darshan Singh paid an amount of Rs.34,000/- to the President of the Society but OP No.1 has admitted the receipt of an amount of Rs.32,000/- and not Rs.34,000/- from Sh.Darshan Singh.  OP No.1 has produced the copy of proceeding book – Annexure OP1/A, which shows that name of Sh.Darshan Singh figures at serial No.89. OP No.1 has also produced a copy of the list of members Annexure OP1/B, which shows that the name of Sh.Darshan Singh figures at serial No.682. Apart from that, OP No.1 has also produced a list of unscreened members Category ‘B’ – Annexure OP1/C, which shows that the name of Sh.Darshan Singh figures at serial No.52. This document also shows that 10% amount, 15% amount, 18% interest and a total of Rs.30,700/- in respect of Sh.Darshan Singh was sent to Chandigarh Housing Board. As per affidavit of Mr.I.D.Sachdeva, President of OP No.1, the said amount stands deposited in account No.127 of Chandigarh Housing Board and is not lying with OP No.1. Thus, the contention in the complaint that the name of Sh.Darshan Singh was removed from the list of members prepared by OP No.1 and his membership was sold to some other bogus member cannot be accepted.

10.              So far as the relief claimed by the complainant for including Sh.Darshan Singh in the list of eligible members, the written statement of OP No.1 coupled with affidavit of Mr.I.D.Sachdeva shows that out of 950 members, the screening committee constituted by Cooperative Department, UT, Chandigarh screened only 237 members and 713 members including Sh.Darshan Singh were left out being ineligible on account of technical/clerical error. OP No.1 filed CWP No.6417/1992 in the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking direction to the respondents to include the names of left out members in the list of the eligible members. While issuing notice to the respondents, the Hon’ble High Court passed an order directing the respondents to accept the installment/earnest money from the petitioners without prejudice to their right to contest the maintainability of petition on merits. That writ petition has not yet been decided by the Hon’ble High Court. Since OP No.1 is already seized of the situation for inclusion of the names of left out members in the list of the eligible members, we feel that the allegations leveled by the complainant against OP No.1 are not justified. Furthermore, the Chandigarh Housing Board has not allotted any land to OP No.1 even though 92 members who have paid the enhanced price. In these circumstances, we do not find any material on record pointing out any deficiency in service on the part of OPs. The complainant cannot compel the OPs to include him in the list of the eligible members for the allotment of dwelling unit by OP No.1 till the decision in CWP No.6417/1992 is rendered by the Hon’ble High Court in favour of OP No.1.

11.              For the reasons recorded above, the complaint is devoid of any merit and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

12.              The certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.