DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> CC No. 357 of 24.12.2007<br /> Decided on : 17-03-2008 <br /> <br /> Mohinder Singh S/o Sh. Bhajan Singh R/o # 570, Street No. 4, Mehal Mubarak Colony, Sangrur.<br /> ... Complainant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> Improvement Trust, Bathinda through its Chief Administrator/Executive Officer<br /> <br /> ...Opposite party<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM :<br /> Sh. Lakhbir Singh, President<br /> Sh. Hira Lal Kumar, Member<br /> <br /> For the Complainant : Sh.A.S. Chahal, Advocate.<br /> For the Opposite parties : Sh. M.R. Gupta, Advocate. <br /> <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> LAKHBIR SINGH, PRESIDENT<br /> 1. Instant one is a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') which has been preferred by the complainant seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to allot him an alternative plot of the size of 144 Sq. yards in its 49.50 acres scheme at Bathinda; hand-over the possession thereof; pay Rs. 4.00 Lacs aongwith interest @ 18% P.A. and Rs. 6.000/- as cost of the complaint.<br /> 2. Briefly put the case of the complainant is that opposite party had floated a scheme of residential colony known as 49.50 acres scheme. Complainant had also applied for one residential plot under this scheme. Initially he was allotted plot No. 149 measuring 144 Sq. yards vide Memo No. 462 dated 19.2.99. Vide letter No. 1094 dated 26.3.01 opposite party changed the allotment of this plot. In its place, plot No. 135 of 144 Sq. yards was given due to the change in the plan. He has paid the entire price of the plot. Last installment of Rs. 28,475/- alongwith interest was deposited on 20.11.01. He was entitled to the possession of the plot then and there on deposit of money. Despite this, possession has not so far been given. Letter dated 20.10.04 was issued by him with the request that possession be delivered after demarcation of this plot No. 135, but to no effect. It is further averred by him that he has come to know that area of this plot has been reduced at the site. Chairman had agreed to give him alternative plot of the same size in the same scheme lying vacant such as plot No. 2 to 13, 198, 28, 39, 41 and 42. Nothing has been done so far. Prices of the material are rising day by day. Several requests were made to the opposite party for getting the plot and its possession, but to no effect.<br /> 3. On being put to notice,. Opposite party filed reply of the complaint taking legal objections that complaint is not maintainable in the present form; it is false and frivolous; he has not come with clean hands and he is estopped from filing the complaint by his act and conduct. Letter No. 779 dated 16.4.04 was issued to him for depositing the enhanced amount of compensation but that has not been deposited by him. He was bound to complete the formalities such as execution of agreement regarding plot within 30 days from the date of allotment but he has not completed them. Letter No. 9 dated 3.1.05 was issued for execution of agreement and fulfilling of other formalities and taking the possession, but no steps have been taken by him. He has not made full and final payment of the installments. Last installment of Rs. 29,765/- was to be deposited upto 18.8.01 as per schedule of payment but he paid less amount i.e. Rs. 28,475/- on 20.11.01. He was asked to pay Rs. 1214/- within 7 days. He cannot take benefit of his own negligence. Possession cannot be delivered to him unless he completes the requisite formalities. They admit that originally plot No. 149 was allotted. Thereafter this plot was exchanged with plot No. 135 due to change in the site plan. As per the site, area of plot No. 135 has been reduced. No assurance was given to him to give alternative plot of the same size. In the allotment letter, it has been specifically mentioned that price of the plot is subject to variation with reference to the actual measurement at the site. It denies the remaining averments in the complaint.<br /> 4. In support of his averments contained in the complaint, complainant has produced in evidence his affidavit (Ex. C-1), photocopy of Form B (Ex. C-2), photocopy of terms and conditions (Ex. C-3), photocopy of Memo No. 462 dated 19.2.99 (Ex. C-4), photocopy of letter No. 1094 dated 26.3.01 (Ex. C-5), photocopies of Forms No. 141, 159, 161, 166, 87 and 195 (Ex. R-6 to Ex. R-11 respectively), photocopy of application dated 12.11.01 (Ex. C-12), photocopy of legal notice (Ex. C-13), photocopies of letters dated 20.10.04, 17.2.05, 27.9.05, 27.9.05, 27.9.05, 8.8.05, 28.8.07 and 1.11.07 (Ex. C-14 to Ex. C-21 respectively), Detail of plots of 144 Sq. Yards (Ex. C-22), photocopy of noting of Chairman of the opposite party (Ex.C-23), photocopy of letter No. 3161 dated 20.10.06 (Ex. C-24) and photocopy of page of register regarding payments made by him (Ex. C-25).<br /> 5. In rebuttal, on behalf of the opposite party photocopy of letters No. 779, 9, 1517 and 3658 (Ex. R-1 to Ex. R-4) respectively, affidavit of Sh. Gora Lal, E.O. (Ex. R-5) and photocopy of allotment letter (Ex. R-6) have been tendered in evidence.<br /> 6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Apart from this, we have gone through the record.<br /> 7. Complainant in his affidavit Ex. C-1 reiterates his version in the complaint. Originally plot No. 149 was allotted to him vide allotment letter, copy of which is Ex. C-4. Subsequently plot No. 135 was given to him inplace of plot No. 149 vide letter copy of which is Ex. C-5. Complainant has deposited Rs. 2,19,975/- with the opposite party. Copies of the receipts are Ex. C-6 to Ex. C-11. A sum of Rs. 28,475/- was deposited by him vide draft No. 539296 dated 12.11.01 as is evident from his application Ex. C-12. Various payments received by the opposite party have also been shown in Ex. C-25 and Ex. R-3. As per para No. 7 of the allotment letter demarcation is to be taken by the allottee. He is required to complete the building on the allotted plot within three years from the date of issuance of the allotment letter. Demarcation is to be given by the opposite party. In other words, it is the opposite party which is to give possession of the plot. An application dated 20.10.04 copy of which is Ex. C-14 was also moved by him to the opposite party with the request that demarcation of the plot be given to him. Thereafter he submitted another application dated 17.2.05, copy of which is Ex. C-15, which was received by the opposite party on 23.2.05 with the request that he wanted to raise construction on the plot No. 135 and its possession be delivered to him. Alongwith application, he sent agreement form, photographs, blank stamp papers worth Rs. 300/- and an affidavit as well. Vide applications dated 27.9.05, copies of which are Ex. C-16 to Ex. C-18, he brought it to the notice of the opposite party that area of plot No. 135 has been reduced at the site and that alternative plot of this size be given to him so that he may raise construction. He further gave offer that incase the area of the plot is somewhat more, he is ready and willing to pay the price thereof. Similar other applications copies of which are Ex. C-19 to Ex. C-21 were also submitted by him. At that time, some plots were there with the opposite party out of which alternative plot could be given as is clear from the report, copy of which is Ex. C-23. Contention of the learned counsel for the opposite party that vide letter dated 16.4.04, copy of which is Ex. R-1, complainant was required to deposit Rs. 26,640/- as enhanced price, but he has not deposited the same and that he has not executed the agreement form although he was required to do so vide letter copy of which is Ex. R-2, is not tenable. Letters copies of which are Ex. R-1, Ex. R-2 and Ex. R-4 pertain to plot No. 135. Admittedly the area of this plot has been reduced. Its possession has not been delivered although the amount referred to above has been deposited by him. In such a situation, how can the opposite party say that complainant should deposit more amount particularly when area of plot No. 135 is not 144 Sq. yards and alternative plot has not been alloted nor possession of the plot has been given. Opposite party is using the amount deposited by the complainant to his detriment without giving anything in return to him. Hence, there is deficiency in service on its part.<br /> 8. Now question arises as to which relief should be accorded to the complainant. In view of our foregoing discussion, direction deserves to be given to the opposite party to allot him an alternative plot of 144 Sq. yards in its 49.50 acres scheme at Bathinda and deliver its possession to him. Further direction which is warranted is that opposite party should pay interest on the amount deposited by the complainant with it @9% P.A. till delivery of the possession of the alternative plot. He is craving for a compensation of Rs.4.00 Lacs. There is no case to allow it in view of the relief which is going to be accorded as above. Out of interest and compensation one can be allowed.<br /> 9. In the premises written above, complaint is allowed against the opposite party with cost of Rs. 2,000/-. Opposite party is directed to do as under :<br /> i) Allot an alternative plot of 144 Sq. yards to the complainant in its 49.50 acres scheme at Bathinda and deliver the possession thereof to him.<br /> ii) Pay interest on the amount already deposited by the complainant with it @ 9% P.A. from the dates of its respective deposits till the date of delivery of the possession of the plot.<br /> Compliance of this order be made within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.<br /> Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned and file be consigned.<br /> Pronounced :<br /> 17-03-2008 (Lakhbir Singh )<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Hira Lal Kumar)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />