DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,<br /> BATHINDA (PUNJAB)<br /> <br /> EA No. 32 of 31-05-2010<br /> Decided on : 30-07-2010 <br /> <br /> Raj Kaur W/o Sh. Baldev Singh, R/o Power House Road, Bathinda, through her General Power of Attorney Holder Tripatpal Singh S/o Sh. Harpal Singh, R/o Power House Road, Bathinda.<br /> .... Complainant/Applicant<br /> Versus<br /> <br /> 1.Manish Kumar, Addl. Chief Administrator, Punjab Urban Planning & Development Autority, Bathinda.<br /> 2.Navreet Grewal, Executive Officer, Punjab Urban Planning & Development Authority, Bathinda. <br /> ... Opposite party/Respondent<br /> <br /> Complaint under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection<br /> Act, 1986.<br /> <br /> QUORUM <br /> <br /> Ms. Vikramjit Kaur Soni, President<br /> Dr. Phulinder Preet, Member<br /> Sh. Amarjeet Paul, Member<br /> <br /> For the applicant : Sh. Ramandeep Singh, counsel for the applicant/complainant <br /> For the respondent : Sh. Ajitinder Pal Singh Chahal, Advocate. <br /> Counsel for the opposite parties <br /> O R D E R<br /> <br /> VIKRAMJIT KAUR SONI, PRESIDENT<br /> <br /> 1. This order disposes of the execution application filed under Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 which has been preferred by the complainant through her counsel Sh. Ramandeep Singh Cheema seeking direction from this Forum to the opposite parties to comply with the order dated 12-03-2008 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Bathinda in CC No. 264 of 07-092007. Her further prayer is that opposite parties be punished as per provisions of Section 27 of the Act as the opposite parties have not complied with the order of this Forum. The opposite parties contested the complaint which was decided on 12-03-2008. The effective part of the order dated 12-03-2008 is reproduced as under :-<br /> “In the result, complaint is allowed against the opposite parties with cost of Rs. 1,000/-. Opposite parties are directed to do as as under :-<br /> i) Provide all the facilities of corner plot to the complainant with respect to plot No. 888-C situated at Urban Estate, Phase III, Bathinda.<br /> ii) Refrain from divesting her of user of 10% extra land of plot with respect to plot No. 888-C and further re-allotting it to any other person.<br /> iii) Pay Rs. 5,000/- to the complainant as compensation under Section 14(1)(d) of the Act<br /> Compliance regarding payment of cost and compensation be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order failing which the amount of compensation would carry interest @9% P.A. till realisation.”<br /> 3. The complainant alleged that the opposite parties have not complied with the directions of this Forum given in the order dated 12-03-2008. During the pendency of the application, the opposite parties paid Rs. 1,000/- as cost, Rs. 5000/- as compensation and Rs. 1044/- upto date interest on the amount of compensation to the complainants through cheques before this Forum and the counsel for the complainant made statement separately in this regard on 07-07-2010.<br /> 4. The counsel for the complainant urged before this Forum that the opposite parties have not provided all the facilities of corner plot to the complainant and as such it amounts to non-compliance of the above said order. In this regard he took support of meaning of 'Corner' as<br /> <br /> mentioned in 'The New Marriam – Webster Dictionary' which reads as under :-<br /> “Corner : 1 the point or angle formed by the meeting of lines, edges or sides 2. the place where two streets come together”. <br /> 5. On the other hand, Sh. Ajitinder Pal Singh Chhahal, learned counsel for the opposite parties produced before this Forum a copy of letter dated 22-02-2010 of the complainant alongwith the photograph of the Plot No. 888-C and argued that complainant is availing all the facilities of corner plot as per the order dated 12-03-2008.<br /> 6. We have heard the counsel for the parties and have gone through record. A perusal of letter dated 22-02-2010 of the complainant reveals that there is proposal of the opposite parties for installation of Milk Booth in the extra land which remains vacant after providing the full facilities of the corner plot. The complainant has requested the opposite parties vide said letter that she is ready to pay the genuine charges for that additional place. In the said letter, there is nothing mentioned that complainant has not been given facility of corner plot and she is entitled to any additional place rather she has written that there is extra land after providing her the benefit of corner plot. Moreover, photograph of plot No. 888-C also shows that plot No. 888-C meets the specification of Corner i.e. “Corner : 1 the point or angle formed by the meeting of lines, edges or sides. <br /> 7. Thus, this Forum is of the view that the opposite parties have fully complied with the order dated 12-03-2008 of this Forum and nothing remains pending. Hence, this application fails and is hereby dismissed without any order as to costs. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 8. A copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and the file be consigned to record.<br /> Pronounced<br /> 30-07-2010 (Vikramjit Kaur Soni)<br /> President<br /> <br /> <br /> (Dr. Phulinder Preet)<br /> Member<br /> <br /> <br /> (Amarjeet Paul)<br /> Member