BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.149 of 2022

      Date of Instt. 06.05.2022

      Date of Decision: 25.04.2023

Paramdeep Kaur, aged about 46 years, wife of S. Gurdeep Singh, resident of VPO Bhogpur, Opp. Police Station Ward No.-1, Tehsil Bhogpur, Distt. 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. M. S. Sood, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that a LIG flat No.75-A Second Floor of the JIT under its 51.5 acre scheme known as Bibi Bhani Complex, Guru Amar Dass Nagar, Jalandhar, which was allotted under BC category to the complainant for a total sum of Rs.6,14,954/, vide allotment letter No.JIT/8027 dated 28.01.2010 as per 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 plot, which was also acknowledged by the opposite party 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. Thereafter, 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 execution of the agreement to sell as per the clause No.7 of the allotment letter and completed all the papers formalities after sining desired documents and the OP was required to handover possession of the flats immediately thereafter but the possession of the flat has yet not been delivered inspite of the fact that the complainant made repeated visits to the office of OP till today. However, the agreement for sale was executed as on dated 05.03.2010. Upto the month of January, 2015 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 since January, 2015. The complainant had also written her request demanding possession of the flat which was duly received by the OP as on 16.02.2015. The complainant has also visited at the said complex, and noticed that none of the allottee is residing there and the possession of the flats were delivered to some of the allottees only in papers and that too without providing basic amenities at the site. And as such offer of possession or delivery of possession of flat without basic amenities to allottees was not a valid offer of possession in the eyes of law. The complainant came across many other allottees of 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 like water supply and sewerage connection have not been properly installed when the possession of the flats was commenced to be given. Since these grievances of the all the allottees were common, as such, all most all the allottees of this complex of JIT as well as the complainant jointly and severally met the concerned officials of JIT 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. The actual and factual position at the site of the Bibi Bhani Complex, Jalandhar can easily be noticed from the news items as appeared in the different News Papers published from Jalandhar. Some of the latest news cuttings are attached herewith. It is worth mentioning here that in the absence of the aforesaid basic amenities and lack of development facilities in the flats, the condition of the flats was not worth living yet some of the allottees were forced to take possession of their respective flats and some of them were fraudulently given possession in papers as they were called in the office of JIT situated at Model Town Road, Jalandhar and allottees were made to sign possession slips, however, for getting possession they were asked to visit at the spot later on. Uptill today, many of the alottees have taken symbolic possession of the flats in the above manner but none of the allotee could dare to shift therein as these flats have not been properly built up, sub-standard material has been used in the construction and that too has also not been properly constructed, water supply to the flats is not proper and the sewerage pipes lines are lying blocked. There are no boundary walls of the said complex. In fact, due to use of sub-standard material in construction about 10/11 years ago and at present, all the flats rather entire complex is in dilapidated condition, which render it unsafe and unfit for human habitation, as such, none of the allottee could dare to shift there in the last 10/11 years. Therefore, now, it is in abandoned condition. The complainant and all other allottees time and again approached the JIT authorities and requested to complete the development works and provide the basic facilities but no action has ever been taken by the JIT even after firm assurances. On account of the above said shortcomings and drawbacks in the flats as well as in the complex of the JIT, the complainant is now not ready to get the possession of the flat allotted to her. Even otherwise, in the absence of Completion/Occupation Certificate, the actual and physical possession of a flat cannot be legally delivered. The complainant is entitled to be compensated for non- delivery of possession with all basic amenities with the flat in question as in the absence of basic amenities, mere offer of delivery of possession of the said flat was of no use 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 return the entire deposited amount of Rs.6,14,954/- alongwith interest @ 18% from the dates of making deposits till realization of this amount and further to award interest @ 18% on the entire amount deposited for the flat for the period it is lying blocked as neither possession nor the title has been transferred in the name of the complainant. Further, OPs be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.33,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complainant was allotted LIG Flat No.75 A SF in development scheme 51.5 Acres Bibi Bhani Complex Jalandhar. It is further averred that the OP vide memo no 2351 dated 16.10.18 unequivocally offered the possession of site in dispute to complainant. It is further averred that the present complaint is hopelessly time bared and has been filed after a lapse about 4 yrs. The claim for monetary compensation filed by the complainant is time barred and hence not maintainable before this Commission. The complainant has mislead this Commission and got issued a notice in the present complaint which is barred by law of limitation and operation of law of estoppel. The complaint is liable to be returned as the complainant has not come to the Court with clean hands. On merits, the factum with regard to allotment of the flat No.75-A, Second Floor 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 counsel for the complainant very minutely.

6.                It is not disputed that the complainant was allotted LIG Flat No.75-A, Second 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.6,14,954/- 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-13. The grievance of the complainant is that despite taking the installments and the entire amount, the possession of 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 was to 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, but no physical possession on the spot was given to the complainant. The construction material and fittings in the flat were not as per PWD standard and sub-standard material was used. This clearly shows the deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

7.                The OP has raised a contention that the present complaint is time barred and has been filed after a lapse about four years. It has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission, in “Manoj Bagroy Vs. M/s N. H. Matcon” in consumer complaint no.429 of 2019, decided on 07.01.2020 that even if the possession is taken by the consumer, it would be a incomplete and invalid delivery of possession for the want of the amenities. It was observed by the Hon'ble State Commission in the above said case that the OP had not obtained the occupation certificate and completion certificate from the competent authorities to enable them to deliver the complete and effective possession to the allottess. Until and unless they obtain such certificate, it cannot be held that complete possession has been delivered and there is continuous cause of action in favour of the complainant till the obtaining of such certificates by the OP and the complaint filed by the complainant was held to be within limitation.

8.                As discussed above the facts of allotment of LIG Flat No.75-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 2 ½ 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-16 to Ex.C-24. Perusal of these news publications show that the project was incomplete when the possession was delivered. People of the locality protested for lack of amenities. No development was done. Statement of XEN has been proved as Ex.C-25 in which he has stated that there are water supply and sewerage issues in the flats. Sewerage is blocked and water pipes are leaking. In a case tiled as ‘Sushil Kumar Vs. JIT’ before this Commission, Local Commissioner was appointed, who gave his report that the water has not yet been released, there is blockage of sewerage and leak in pipe line. The order dated 12.03.2019 has been proved as Ex.C26. The OP has not produced on record any document from where it can be ascertained that the work of water supply and sewerage system etc. has been completed.

9.                In the present case also only symbolic possession has been given without amenities and without obtaining completion/occupation certificate. The OP has filed on record the document Ex.OP-1, wherein complainant was asked to take possession, but it is not proved that the amenities were provided till that time. So, from all the angles, it is clear that there is deficiency in service and negligence on the part of the OP and as such, we are of the opinion that after waiting for a long time, the complainant became frustrated and demanded the return of the money along with interest, compensation and litigation expenses.       

10.              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 complainant is entitled for the relief as claimed and thus, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP is directed to return the entire deposited amount of Rs.6,14,954/- 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.

11.              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     

25.04.2023         Member                          Member           President