Chandigarh

DF-I

CC/395/2023

SUNITA WALIA W/O SH. VARINDER WALIA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S BAJWA DEVELOPERS LIMITED, THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR SH. JARNAIL SINGH BAJWA - Opp.Party(s)

MUKESH VERMA

01 Aug 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION-I,

U.T. CHANDIGARH

                                     

Consumer Complaint No.	:	CC/395/2023
Date of Institution	:	18/08/2023
Date of Decision	:	01/08/2024

 

1. Sunita Walia w/o Sh. Varinder Walia
2. Varinder Walia s/o Sh. Prabh Dayal

Both residents of House No.108, Sector 15-A, Chandigarh 160015.

… Complainants

V E R S U S

M/s Bajwa Developers Limited, through its Managing Director, Sh. Jarnail Singh Bajwa o/o Sunny Business Centre, Fifth Floor, Above Gopal Sweets, Desumajra, Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali.

… Opposite Party

 

CORAM :	SHRI PAWANJIT SINGH	PRESIDENT
	MRS. SURJEET KAUR	MEMBER
	SHRI SURESH KUMAR SARDANA	MEMBER

 

                                                                               

ARGUED BY	:	Ms.Tanveen Kaur, Advocate for Sh. Rajesh Verma, Advocate for complainants
	:	OP ex-parte.

 

Per Pawanjit Singh, President

1. The present consumer complaint has been filed by Sunita Walia and Varinder Walia, complainants against the aforesaid opposite party (hereinafter referred to as the OP).  The brief facts of the case are as under :-

1. It transpires from the allegations, as projected in the consumer complaint, that the OP had carved out a number of plots of different sizes in Sector 124, Sunny Enclave, Mohali (hereinafter referred to as “subject project”) for residential as well as commercial purposes. The complainants, after going through the alluring promises and in view of the facilities provided, applied for a residential plot No.714-B of 200 sq.yards (hereinafter referred to as “subject plot”) in the subject project with the OP for their personal use. On 17.3.2016, complainants vide receipt (Annexure C-1) paid ₹15,000/- to the OP towards no dues and the OP had issued No Dues Certificate dated 18.3.2016 (Annexure C-2) to them.  After receiving the entire sale consideration from the complainants, OP transferred the subject plot in their favour vide registered sale deed (Annexure C-3) dated 11.4.2016. The complainants had also paid ₹15,000/- towards Punjab Infrastructure Development Fee charges, ₹300/- for mutation, ₹3,000/- towards computerization of land records and ₹1,000/- for measurement vide receipts (Annexure C-4 colly.). In the registered sale deed, it was also mentioned that the subject plot is free from all encumbrances and that the OP is owner in possession of the same and no stay has been granted and in case of any dispute in future, then the seller would be legally responsible.  Thereafter the complainant approached the OP several times with the request to hand over the actual physical possession of the subject plot, but, every time OP delayed the matter on one pretext or the other.  More than seven years have already lapsed and till date the actual possession of the subject has not been delivered to the complainants, despite of the fact that the OP had received the entire sale consideration from them. In number of cases it has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission that where the possession of the fully developed plot has not been offered nor the amount deposited has been refunded, there is continuing cause of action.  In this manner, the aforesaid acts of the OP amounts to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. OP was requested several times to admit the claim, but, with no result.  Hence, the present consumer complaint.
2. Though the OP submitted its reply, evidence and vakalatnama through registry, but, as it had already been proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 29.11.2023, the same were ordered to be taken off the record vide order dated 24.1.2024 by this Commission.

2. In order to prove their case, complainants have tendered/proved their evidence by way of affidavit and supporting documents.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the complainant and also gone through the file carefully, including written arguments.
   1. At the very outset, it may be observed that when it is an admitted case of the complainants that they had purchased the subject plot from the OPs vide registered sale deed dated 11.4.2016 (Annexure
      C-3) and that the actual possession of the subject plot has not been handed over to the complainants, the case is reduced to a narrow compass as it is to be determined if the complainants are entitled for actual possession from OP in the light of registered sale deed dated 11.4.2016 (Annexure C-3) already executed in their favour in the year 2016, as is the case of the complainants.
   2. As per the case of the complainants, though the sale deed (Annexure C-3) has already been executed by the OP in their favour, but, since the actual possession has not been delivered to the complainants, they are entitled for the actual possession.  No doubt, the OP is ex-parte in the present case, but, even then the complainants have to prove their own case i.e. to prove that the actual possession was not handed over to them and if the consumer complaint is maintainable in the light of the sale deed (Annexure C-3) and also that the consumer complaint of the complainants is within time.
   3. The recitals in the sale deed (Annexure C-3) clearly indicate that the possession of the subject plot was handed over to the complainants at the time of execution of the sale deed and the relevant portion of the same, in vernacular, is reproduced as below for ready reference :-

“ਕਬਜਾ ਅੱਜ ਦੀ ਮਿਤੀ ਤੋਂ ਹੀ ਉਕਤ ਵੇਚੀ ਗਈ ਜਾਇਦਾਦ ਤੇ ਖਰੀਦਦਾਰਾ ਦਾ ਕਰਵਾ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਹੈ। ਹੁਣ ਮੇਰਾ ਅਤੇ ਕੰਪਨੀ ਦਾ ਵੇਚੀ ਗਈ ਜਾਇਦਾਦ ਦੀ ਬਾਬਤ ਕੋਈ ਵਾਸਤਾ ਜਾਂ ਤਾਲਕ ਨਹੀਂ ਰਿਹਾ ਅਤੇ ਨਾਂ ਹੀ ਹੋਵੇਗਾ। ਹਰ ਕਿਸਮ ਦੇ ਹੱਕ ਤੇ ਅਖਤਿਆਰਾਤ ਇਸ ਜਾਇਦਾਦ ਦੀ ਬਾਬਤ ਬਾਇਆ ਦੀ ਤਰ੍ਹਾਂ ਹੁਣ ਖਰੀਦਦਾਰਾ ਨੂੰ ਹਾਸਲ ਹੋ ਗਏ ਹਨ, ਜੋ ਚਾਹੇ ਸੋ ਕਰੇ। ਖਰਚਾ ਬੈਨਾਮੇ ਦਾ ਖਰੀਦਦਾਰਾ ਨੇ ਹੀ ਕੀਤਾ ਹੈ। ਇਸ ਰਕਬੇ ਬਾਰੇ ਕਿਸੇ ਅਦਾਲਤ ਵੱਲੋਂ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਸਟੇਅ ਆਦਿ ਜਾਰੀ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋਇਆ ਅਤੇ ਇਸ ਰਕਬੇ ਦੀ ਵਿਕਰੀ ਨਾਲ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਦੇ ਕਿਸੇ ਐਕਟ/ਨਿਯਮ ਜਾਂ ਹਦਾਇਤਾਂ ਹੀ ਕੋਈ ਵੀ ਉਲਘਣਾਂ ਨਹੀਂ ਹੋ ਰਹੀ ਹੈ।

Thus, one thing is clear from the recitals in the sale deed, which is admittedly executed in favour of the complainants and has also been duly signed by complainant No.2, husband of complainant No.1, that the possession of the subject plot has actually been handed over to the complainants on 11.4.2016 itself.  Since the ownership as well as possessory title qua the subject plot already stood transferred in the name of the complainants and they are absolute owners in possession of the same and the OP has not been left with any right, title or interest with the subject plot, no relief can be granted by this Commission qua the possessory title. In case the complainants are not in actual possession of the subject plot or they have been ousted from the same, they should approach to the civil court of competent jurisdiction and not to this Commission.  Hence, it is safe to hold that the consumer complaint of the complainants is not maintainable before this Commission.

4. Now coming to the question of limitation, as admittedly the subject plot was transferred by the OP in the name of complainants on 11.4.2016 through sale deed (Annexure C-3) and since then the complainants have never raised any issue with respect to the actual possession of the subject plot with the OP or with any other authority or have challenged the title sale i.e. copy of sale deed before any court or authority and have filed the present consumer complaint on 18.8.2023 only i.e. after more than seven years of the accrual of cause of action, it is safe to hold that the consumer complaint of the complainants is hopelessly time barred and is not maintainable before this Commission.

4. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the present consumer complaint, being not maintainable and time barred, is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.
6. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned.

01/08/2024	Sd/- [Pawanjit Singh] President
	Sd/-
	[Surjeet Kaur] Member
	Sd/-
	[Suresh Kumar Sardana] Member