1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under the Consumer Protection Act against the opposite parties on the averments that on 14.7.1977 plot No.683, Guru Hargobind Nagar, Phagwara measuring 200 sq.yards had been allotted and part of sale money was received by Improvement Trust, Phagwara. The plot has been part of the 76 acres land acquired on G.T.Road, Phagwara. In substance allegations of the complainant are that the Improvement Trust, Phagwara has received Rs.2,07,550/- as enhancement charges and Rs.1,01,700/- as non construction charges total as Rs.3,09,250/- from the complainant which were paid by him under protest. It is alleged that the trust has failed to provide the details or calculations as to how the enhancement charges have been calculated. It is further alleged that trust failed to give possession of the plot to the complainant as per allotment letter. There was variation in size of the plot and request was made to the improvement trust that neighbours have encroached the area, so physical possession may be provided as per allotment letter but no action was taken on his request. The size of the plot was shorter in size i.e 198.86 sq.yards whereas the improvement trust has allotted plot measuring 200 sq.yards. The request was made to improvement trust to provide possession of exact size or to compensate for the area encroached by the neighbour of the plot No.683. It is alleged that despite several reminders improvement trust failed to specify the exact possession date and forcibly collected Rs.3,09,250/- from him. It is deceptive practice. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for Rs.5 Lacs as compensation and for setting aside enhancement and non construction charges and to refund the same alongwith interest.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared and filed a written reply pleading that as far as enhancement is concerned, the real facts are that after acquisition of land, plots were allotted on the basis of first cum first serve at reserve price and by way of auction. Some land owners had approached Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala for enhancement of reserve price. The said tribunal has amended award vide order dated 2.6.1987. Land owners approached Hon'ble High Court against order of Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala. The matter was decided by Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 10.8.2007 and matter was remitted to Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala for fresh decision. The said tribunal has decided award on 16.3.2009 and the Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala has announced compensation rate @ Rs.4100/- per month instead of Rs.1400/- and has also announced 30% solatium on same besides interest @ 12% per annum from the date of acquisition of land. The improvement trust/opposite parties have filed a writ petition against order of Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala before Hon'ble High Court but the same was dismissed vide order dated 5.2.2010. Answering improvement trust/opposite parties filed Special Leave Petition before Hon'ble Supreme Court of India challenging the award dated 16.3.2009 passed by Land Acquisition Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Kapurthala but the same was declined by Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The entire litigation with land owners took about 32 years. During this period, plots were allotted to various persons on reserve rate. The allotment letter and sale deeds executed in favour of purchasers and subsequent purchasers were only conditional one and it has been mentioned in the agreement with subsequent purchasers and accordingly the complainant was asked to deposit the enhanced amount. As per as non-construction charges of Rs.1,01,700/- are concerned, the same had been demanded in compliance of order of this Forum dated 6.1.2012 passed by the Forum on complaint of present complainant. The possession of plot had been given to complainant on 3.5.2013 and copy of Tripartite agreement was sent to complainant vide letter No.851 dated 6.6.2013. Moreover the complainant was bound by the terms and conditions of original allotment letter dated 16.7.1977, which includes clause of variation in size of plots. The complainant has applied before improvement trust vide letter dated 11.3.2014 to transfer property in the name of Sukhjit Singh son of Paramjit Singh. He has also furnished affidavit of himself and subsequent purchaser Sukhjit Singh. Complainant has given written application dated 8.3.2014 that he has received full and final payment of Rs.61,00,000/- and had submitted no objection to purchase of property by Sukhjit Singh and after clearance of all dues, the plot in question was transferred in the name of Sukhjit Singh vide letter No.696 dated 31.3.2014 and from 31.3.2014 the right of complainant being consumer came to an end. It is pertinent to mention that non-construction charges has been demanded as per orders of this Forum. Complainant has filed execution before this Forum for non-compliance of order dated 6.1.2012. While deciding the execution, this Forum has directed complainant to submit map and other formalities with improvement trust and trust was directed to handover possession within 3 days. The orders of this Forum was complied and possession was given to complainant. Moreover, as far as enhanced amount is concerned, the remedy lies before Civil Court for declaring enhancement illegal and void. They denied other material averments of the complainant.

3. In support of his complaint, complainant has tendered affidavits Ex.CA and Ex.CB alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C39, Ex.C-11/2, Ex.C-14/2 and Ex.C-27/1 and closed evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.OP1to3/A alongwith copies of documents Ex.OP1to3/1 to ex.OP1to3/16 and closed evidence.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the opposite party.

6. It is not disputed that complainant was allotted plot No.683, Guru Hargobind Nagar, Phagwara measuring 200 sq.yards by Improvement Trust, Phagwara. The main dispute between the parties is regarding enhancement charges of Rs.2,07,550/- and non construction charges of Rs.1,01,700/-. The complainant has already paid above said amounts to the opposite party trust. However, the complainant contended that amount was deposited by him under protest. The complainant has admittedly sold the plot in question and the present complaint was filed by him after sale of plot by him. So he was not consumer of the plot on the date of institution of the present complaint. However the complainant contended that he was consumer when he deposited the enhancement charges and non construction charges. Ex.C36 is letter dated 23.12.2013 written by E.O. of Improvement Trust, Phagwara to the complainant for depositing Rs.2,07,348/- on account of enhancement of price, Rs.202/- on account of difference of interest and Rs.1,01,700/- as per orders of this Forum. In this letter it is further mentioned that the trust has filed a case before Hon'ble National Commission and complainant shall be bound by the orders of the same. This letter is dated 23.12.2013 and on the same date the complainant deposited the above said amount of Rs.3,09,250/- vide receipt No.48 book No.290 dated 23.12.2013 Ex.C37. There is no need of saying that the parties are bound by the orders of Hon'ble National Commission. This fact is also mentioned in order dated 19.3.2013 passed by this Forum in proceedings under section 27 of the Act, copy of which is Ex.OP1to3/2 on record. Complainant has given undertaking Ex.OP1to3/10 wherein it is mentioned as under:-

"I, Rajnesh Madhok S/o Sat Parkash Madhok resident of Gali No.2, Nehru Nagar, Phagwara do hereby under take that I shall deposit the amount whatsoever it may be on account of enhancement of sale price immediately on the receipt of demand notice from the Improvement Trust, Phagwara. I understand that such amount shall be first and paramount charge over plot No.683, Guru Hargobind Nagar, Phagwara and in case of my failure to deposit the enhanced sale money, the trust shall be at liberty to get this amount by putting my plot and building to auction.

I also undertake to construct building over plot No.683, Guru Hargobind Nagar, Phagwara exactly according to the building bye-laws and in accordance with the plan sanctioned or to be sanctioned by the Improvement Trust, Phagwara. In case of breach, the trust shall be at liberty to take action as per its rules.

It is worth mentioning here that the amount of enhancement will be deposited in the trust funds as per decision of the Court".

7. So complainant has himself given undertaking regarding depositing the amount on account of enhancement. The grievance of the complainant regarding calculation of formula vide which enhancement amount has been claimed can not be decided in the present summary proceedings. In case complainant is aggrieved by the enhanced amount paid by him, he has at liberty to approach the Civil Court. Ex.OP1to3/13 is affidavit submitted by the purchaser of the plot to the trust undertaking to pay all arrears including remaining installments, penal interest, extension fee, if decided by any court. Ex.OP1to3/14 is letter written by complainant to the trust that he has received full payment of the plot in question and for transfer of plot in the name of Sukhjit Singh. The purchaser has not alleged any shorter area in respect of the plot purchased by him from the complainant. The possession was given to the complainant as per order passed in proceedings under section 27 of the Act as is evident from copy of order Ex.OP1to3/2. So, if there was variation in the area of the plot in question, the complainant should have taken this issue in the earlier proceedings. Enhanced demand from the complainant is on account of enhancement of compensation by Land Acquisition Tribunal. As already observed above, if the complainant has any grievance regarding the enhanced demand from him by the opposite party trust, he should approach the Civil Court as in the present summary proceedings, the formula of enhancing price of the allotted plot can not be effectively adjudicated upon. For deciding the validity of the formula of demanding enhance price the total area of the acquired land, the amount enhanced by the tribunal, the area left for roads, parks etc and the area sold by the auction will have to be taken into consideration. The complainant has failed to prove any deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

8. In view of above discussion, we hold that there is no merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under the rules. File be consigned to the record room.