BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.224 of 2019

      Date of Instt. 01.07.2019

      Date of Decision: 30.11.2022

Harpreet Kaur Sidhu wife of Ravinder Singh Sidhu, R/o House No.36-C, Ravinder Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

Jalandhar Improvement Trust, Jalandhar through its Chairman/Administrator.

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)                                

Present:       Sh. R. K. Arora, Adv. Counsel for Complainant.

                   Sh. Sachin Sharda, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Jaswant Singh Dhillon (Member)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the complainant applied for allotment of flat with the OP/JIT in its 51.5 acre scheme known as Bibi Bhani Complex, wherein flats were proposed to be constructed Near Guru Amar Dass Nagar, G. T. Road, Amritsar Bye Pass, Jalandhar and a LIG flat No.89-A, Ground Floor for a total sum of Rs.6,26,422/- was allotted to the complainant vide allotment letter no.JIT/8038 dated 28.01.2010 as per the terms and conditions enumerated in the said allotment letter. The very first payment towards the earnest money of Rs.60,000/- was paid by the complainant before the allotment of flat, which was also acknowledged by the OP in the above said allotment letter. As per the clause no.15 of the allotment letter, the allottee was required to deposit subsequent installments from time to time, as such, the installments were paid by the allottee i.e. the complainant, towards the sale price of the aforesaid flat, total Rs.6,26,422/-. Thereafter, the payment of all the installments towards the sale price of the flat allotted by the OP, the complainant approached the concerned officials of the OP for completion of the paper formalities as described in the terms and conditions of the allotment letter and the OP was required to handover possession of the flat within scheduled time frame, but the possession of the flat was not delivered within scheduled time period inspite of repeated requests and demands in this regard. All the payments, fees, costs of documentation and interest on the delayed payments towards the sale price of the flat, were made as per the demands raised by the officials of the OP, but the possession of the flat was not given to the complainant even after repeated and continuous requests. During the month of May, 2017, the OP had commenced to write offer letters for delivery of possession of the flats to some of the flat owners. Accordingly, some of the allottees were called by the officials of the OP in its office situated at Skylark Chowk, Jalandhar and got signed the memo of delivery of possession of the flat, meaning thereby, only symbolic possession was given in papers and thereafter after couples of days, the complainant was called at the spot for delivery of physical possession of the flat and on visiting at the spot, the allottees found that the works of wooden door, window pane, paint and white wash were being carried out and there was no explanation from the concerned officials of the OP for the sub-standard material used in construction and from the various other defects, it was clear that construction material and fittings were not according to the ISI/PWD standards. Furthermore, the said flats are not fit for human habitation as there was no supply of water in the flats of the OP and sewerage pipelines were not connected. As such, the complainant could not shift there as the said flat was not fit for living. The complainant came across many other allottees for the flats in the said complex who were also complaining about the similar problems. The problems of all most all the allottees were common as the essential infrastructural works as well as basic amenities such as water supply and sewerage connection were not provided when the possession of the flats was commenced to be given from May, 2017. Since these grievances of all the allottees are common, as such, almost all the allottees of this complex of the OP jointly and severally met the concerned officials of the OP many a times to get these basic amenities, but these have not been provided so far. In order to agitate the matter in issue before the concerned higher authorities, the allottees also got highlighted their grievances in the electronic media and in the print media for redressal of their grievances. In this way, the complainant is suffering great financial loss as his hard earned money lying blocked with the OP and the complainant is not getting interest on the entire payment made to the OP whereas the OP used to charge interest @ of more than 18% per annum in case of any delayed payment and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OP be directed to provide all the promised and proposed amenities in the complex as well as in the said flat in question, which were proposed to be provided as per the Allotment Letter and Brochure of the present scheme especially to ensure the proper and adequate supply of the water and also to ensure proper working of sewerage system and further OP be directed to award penal interest @ 18% on the entire amount deposited for the flat for the period from July, 2012 i.e. proposed date of delivery of flat, till the date all the basic amenities of water supply and sewerage system are provided in the said flat as the complainant could not make use of the said flat even for a single day in view of the fact that the same is not fit for human habitation due to lack of facilities of water supply and sewerage connection and to complete the legal formalities of documentation in favour of complainant, if any, like conveyance deed, agreement of sale etc. Further, OP be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses and to return the entire deposited amount of Rs.6,26,422/- alongwith interest @ 18% from the dates of making deposits till realization of this amount.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the present complaint is not maintainable in the present form. It is further averred that the complainant has not come to the Commission with clean hands and has concealed material fact from this Commission. The complainant has herself taken the possession of the flat after getting duly satisfied with regard to woodwork, internal, water supply, sewerage, electric connection and construction work with regard to the flat in question and have herself signed over the slip of the possession. It is further averred that the claim of the complainant is hopelessly barred by limitation as such complaint deserves to be dismissed on this score alone. On merits, the factum with regard to allotment of the flat to the complainant is admitted, but the other allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement. 

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by the counsel for the complainant, very minutely.

6.                It is not disputed that the complainant was allotted LIG Flat No.89-A, Ground Floor by the OP as per the allotment letter Ex.C2. As per the conditions of the allotment letter, the complainant paid the total amount of Rs.6,26,422/- in installments and earnest money of Rs.60,000/- was deposited before the allotment. The complainant has proved on record the copies of the receipts of payment of installments Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-11. The grievance of the complainant is that despite taking the installments and the entire amount, the flat was not delivered within scheduled time period. The OP has violated the terms and conditions of the allotment letter. As per the Clause-7 of the allotment letter Ex.C-2, the amenities and facilities were to be completed within 2½ years of the allotment and possession will be delivered thereafter, but the facilities and amenities have not been given by the OP. As per the contention of the complainant, the symbolic possession was given by the OP to the complainant and no physical possession on the spot was given to the complainant. This clearly shows the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

7.                As discussed above the facts of allotment of LIG Flat No.89-A and payment of installments has been admitted and proved by the parties. As per Clause No.7 of the allotment letter Ex.C-2, the OP was supposed to construct the flats and provide the development facilities and all other amenities within 2½ years of the allotment and after that the possession was to be delivered. The news publications have been proved on record by the complainant, which are from different newspapers, which have been proved as Ex.C-14 to Ex.C-22. The defence of the OP is shattered with the letter Ex.OP1. This letter itself shows that the work of roads, water supply and sewerage system etc has been completed. The electrification is almost completed and approach road is yet to be completed and the flat owners have been asked to take the possession of the flats, failing which they will be charged Rs.1000/- per month as maintenance charges. This shows that it has categorically been mentioned in it that all the facilities have been provided in the flats, but in actual there are no facilities, which is clear cut deficiency and negligence on the part of the OP and as such, we are of the opinion that after waiting a long time, the complainant became frustrated and demanded the return of the money along with interest, compensation and litigation expenses.                  

8.                So from all the angles, the OP has failed to prove his case and thus, the complainant is entitled for the relief. In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed. From the documents produced on record by both the parties, it is evident that partial possession was handed over to the complainant without the development work and amenities as per the conditions laid down in allotment letter. Therefore, the OP is directed to complete the development work and provide all the amenities and facilities in the flat of the complainant as per the allotment letter and brochure of the present scheme alongwith approach road within three months. They are further directed to complete the procedure of completion of all the legal documents, failing which OP is directed to return the entire deposited amount of Rs.6,26,422/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of making deposits till its realization. Further, OP is directed to pay a compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

9.                Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

30.11.2022         Member                          Member           President