Punjab

Sangrur

CC/932/2015

Armaninderjit Singh - Complainant(s)

Versus

Improvement Trust - Opp.Party(s)

Shri Rajinder Goyal

06 May 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, SANGRUR.

                  

                                                Complaint No.  932

                                                Instituted on:    28.08.2015

                                                Decided on:       06.05.2016

 

Armaninderjit Singh son of Late Shri Manjeet Singh Sidhu son of Atma Singh, resident of H.No.261, Banasar Bagh Road,Sangrur.

                                                                ..Complainant

                                Versus

1.     Improvement Trust, Sunam Road, Sangrur through its Executive Officer.

2.     Chairman, Improvement Trust, Sunam Road, Sangrur.

3.     The Secretary, Department of Local Bodies, Govt. of Punjab, Chandigarh.

                                                        …Opposite parties

 

For the complainant  :       Shri Rajinder Goyal, Advocate.

For Opposite parties         :       Shri Mohit Verma, Advocate.

 

Quorum:   Sukhpal Singh Gill, President

                K.C.Sharma, Member

                Sarita Garg, Member

 

Order by : Sukhpal Singh Gill, President.

 

1.             Shri Armaninderjit Singh, complainant (referred to as complainant in short) has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties (referred to as OPs in short) on the ground that late Manjit Singh Sidhu son of S. Atma Singh (father of the complainant) was the consumers of the OPs as he had been allotted booth number 22 in 7.4 acre Kaula Park Scheme vide letter /memo number 299 dated 24.9.1987 for Rs.40,500/-. Further case of the complainant is that Manjit Singh Sidhu died on 8.8.2013 and he has been survived by his wife Smt. Deep Kaur, daughters Parminderjit Kaur, Arminderjit Kaur and the complainant, as the other legal heirs of Manjit Singh have no objection, if the sale deed of above said booth is executed in his favour.  Further case of the complainant is that earlier in the year 2010, there was a scheme/notification of Govt. of Punjab as per which the sale deed of the property allotted by the Govt. to the allottees shall be executed at the allotment rates and Manjit Singh Sidhu, visited the Ops at that time for getting the sale deed in his favour, but all in vain.  Thereafter the Government issued similar notification which was enforceable upto 30.9.2011, as such he again approached the Ops for the same and made a written request to the Ops on 5.9.2011 and submitted all the documents for the same, but all in vain.  It is further averred that thereafter the Govt. issued again a notification for getting the sale deed executed up to 7th June, 2015, as such, the complainant approached the Ops, but again nothing was done.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the ops be directed to get the sale deed executed in favour of the complainant in respect of booth number 22 on the allotment rate as per the notification issued by the Govt. of Punjab and further claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2.             In reply, legal objections are taken up on the grounds that the complainant is not a consumer of the OPs in question as the plot/booth number 22 was allotted to Manjit Singh Sidhu in auction in the year 1987, which is still in his name, that the complaint is false and frivolous one, as the OPs are always ready to get the sale deed registered in his name subject to submission of the copy of sanctioned map, copy of first electricity bill, copy of completion certificate/map along with the duly attested affidavit  and NOC regarding the no construction fee, that the complainant has no cause of action and locus standi to file the present complaint, that the complainant never visited the OPs, that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form and that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. On merits, it is admitted that the plot/booth number 22 was allotted to Manjit Singh Sidhu in an auction in the year 1987 under 7.4 acre Kaula Park Scheme vide allotment memo number 299 dated 24.9.1987.  It is stated that the Ops have no knowledge about the death of Manjit Singh Sidhu. It is stated that neither the complainant nor any family members of allottee gave the application for the same or to produce the death certificate of Manjit Singh Sidhu. It is further averred that the complainant had already get the possession of the plot/booth from the Ops as per the clause 7 of the allotment letter and the other allegations have been denied. It is stated that the OPs have written a number of letters to get the possession of the plot and it is stated further that the allottee had submitted an application dated 22.4.1991 wherein it has specifically been mentioned that he is unable to construct the building on the plot and sought extension of time.  As such, alleging no deficiency in service on their party, the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

 

3.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 copy of allotment letter, Ex.C-2 copy of payment schedule, Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-11 copies of receipts, Ex.C-12 to Ex.C-13 copy of letters, Ex.C-14 copy of death certificate, Ex.C-15 to Ex.C-20 copy of newspaper cutting, Ex.C-21 affidavit, Ex.C-22 affidavit of Deep Kaur, Ex.C-23 affidavit of Parminderjit Kaur, Ex.C-24 copy of consent letter and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has produced Ex.OP-1 affidavit, Ex.OP-2 copy of allotment letter, Ex.OP-3 andEx.OP-4 copies of letters, Ex.OP-5 copy of payment schedule, Ex.OP-6 and Ex.OP-7 copies of letters, Ex.OP-8 copy of possession letter, Ex.OP-9 copy of sale letter, Ex.OP-10 and Ex.OP-11 copies of agreement to sell, Ex.OP-12 copy of letter, Ex.OP-13 copy of application, Ex.OP-14 and Ex.OP-15 copies of letters, Ex.OP-16 copy of application, Ex.OP-17 copy of authority letter and closed evidence.

 

4.             We have carefully perused the complaint, version of the opposite parties and heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. In our opinion, the complaint merits dismissal, for these reasons.

       

5.             It is not in dispute between the parties that one plot/booth number 22 in 7.4 Acre Kaula Park  scheme was allotted to Manjit Singh Sidhu. It is also on the record that said Manjit Singh Sidhu died on 8.8.2013 and is survived by his wife Smt. Deep Kaur, daughters Parminderjit Kaur, Arminderjit Kaur and son Arminderjit Singh. It is further stated that all the legal heirs of Manjit Singh Sidhu have no objection if the plot/booth in question is transferred in the name of the complainant. The case of the complainant is that during the life time of his father Shri Manjit Singh Sidhu, visited the Ops so many times to get the sale deed registered in his name, but the OPs did not do the same despite his best efforts.  But, in the present case, the complainant has sought the relief of execution of the sale deed of the plot/booth in question in his favour only.  But, we may mention that first of all the complainant has to get the booth in question transferred in his name in the record of the OPs by submitting the required documents, such as no objection from the other legal heirs,  sanctioned plan, copy of completion certificate/map and no objection certificate of the Ops regarding non construction fee only,  but, in the present case, it seems that the complainant has not submitted any such documents to the OPs. In the circumstances, we feel that the complainant is required to submit the required documents as mentioned above to the OPs, so that first of all the plot be transferred in his name and thereafter the sale deed be got registered in his name.  In the circumstances, we find no case of any deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

 

6.             Without going further into the merits of the case, we dismiss the complaint of the complainant. However, the parties are left to bear their own costs. A copy of this order be issued to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to records.

                Pronounced.

                May 6, 2016.

                                                        (Sukhpal Singh Gill)

                                                           President

 

 

                                                           (K.C.Sharma)

                                                              Member

                                                       

 

                                                              (Sarita Garg)

                                                                   Member