DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-II
Udyog Sadan, C-22 & 23, Qutub Institutional Area
(Behind Qutub Hotel), New Delhi-110016.
Case No. 50/2009
Vir Brat & Satya Priya Sharma
A-3/215, Janakpuri,
New Delhi - 110058 ….Complainant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority
Land Sale Department (Rohini)
Vikas Sadan, INA Colony,
New Delhi ...Opposite Party
Date of Institution : 19.01.2009 Date of Order : 19.08.2016
Coram:
Sh. N.K. Goel, President
Ms. Naina Bakshi, Member
Sh. S.S. Fonia, Member
O R D E R
The complaint was initially filed before the State Commission who vide order dated 16.7.2008 transferred the same to this forum.
The complainants have filed the present complaint for non-allotment of a MIG plot in Rohini residential scheme booked in March 1981 with the OP. It is prayed in the complaint that the OP be directed to immediately and without any further delay to allot HIG plot to them or in lieu thereof to compensate them with Rs. 49.99 lacs to enable them to purchase a plot from the Market for their sweet home.
In the written statement, OP has stated that as and when the land is available and priority number of the complainants is covered, they would be allotted a plot on their turn.
Complainants have filed a rejoinder wherein they have inter-alia stated that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C ) No. 8765/2009 and CM No. 6036/2009 dated 16.12.2009 has already directed the OP to clear the back log within 3 years of time frame from the date of orders but to no effect.
Affidavits in evidence as well as written arguments have been filed on behalf of the parties.
We have heard the counsel for the OP. None has appeared on behalf of the complainants to advance arguments despite opportunity given in this behalf.
On 25.2.2016 when none was present on behalf of the complainants, it was stated on behalf of the OP that plot No. 49, Pkt. A2, Sector 34, Rohini, Delhi measuring 60 sq.m. (MIG) has since been allotted to the complainants and the process of handing over the plot is in process. The counsel for the OP also filed copies of documents. On 10.8.2016 when also none was present on behalf of the complainants, the counsel for the OP filed a copy of the Perpetual Lease Deed dated 21.12.2015 executed between the complainants and OP DDA in respect of the above stated plot. Thus, it becomes crystal clear that the above stated plot of MIG category has since been allotted to the complainants and the Perpetual lease Deed in respect thereof has been executed by the OP in their favour. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the prayer made in the complaint has since been complied with by the OP during the pendency of the complaint.
We hold that the complaint has been satisfied. We dispose off the complaint accordingly.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the parties as per regulation 21 of the Consumer Protection Regulations. Thereafter file be consigned to record room.
Announced on 19.08.16.
(S.S. FONIA) (NAINA BAKSHI) (N.K. GOEL) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
Case No. 50/2009
19.8.2016
Present – None.
Vide our separate order of even date pronounced, we have held that the complaint has been satisfied. We dispose off the complaint accordingly. Let the file be consigned to record room.
(S.S. FONIA) (NAINA BAKSHI) (N.K. GOEL) MEMBER MEMBER PRESIDENT
