Sri.D.Krishnappa,<br /> President<br /> <br /> 1. This Complaint is filed by the Complainant under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with his grievance that the Opposite party had allotted a site bearing No.750/A as described in the schedule to this Complaint on 10.02.1995 in favour of one M.Shivanna, thereafter, himself and his grand mother one Doddamma purchased the said site under a Registered Sale Deed dated 25.11.1998 and that Doddamma has executed a Registered will on 24.06.2000 in his favour bequeathing the said site in his favour. Therefore, he became the absolute owner of the said property. Then he approached the Opposite party to obtain title deed of the site on 17.09.2004, but Opposite party issued an endorsement on 08.11.2004 stating that the documents pertaining to that site have been seized by the Police and they are in their custody and until those documents are handed over to them they are unable to process this application. Thereafter, he made several approaches and then made another application on 05.02.2007, but the Opposite party has not executed the sale deed and therefore alleging that the Opposite party has caused deficiency has prayed for the relief as prayed for.<br /> 2. The counsel who represent Opposite party took time to file version, but has failed to file version and on the other hand has filed a memo with a copy of the letter addressed by a Police Officer of Lakshmipuram Police Station. Therefore, the Opposite party has not filed any objection except that letter.<br /> 3. The Complainant has filed his affidavit evidence reproducing what has been stated by him in his Complaint. <br /> <br /> REASONS<br /> <br /> 4. The Complaint filed by the Complainant is not self-explanatory as to find out whether the title deed of site No.750/A of Dattagalli 1st Block was transferred to the allottee namely M.Shivanna by the Opposite party or not. The Complainant has only stated as if that site was allotted to one Shivanna that himself and his grand mother Doddamma purchased the said property under Registered Sale Deed. Therefore, a question arise whether that said Shivanna could have transferred title of that site in favour of this Complainant in the absence of any title transferred to him by the Opposite party. The letter of police produced by the Opposite party discloses that a case has been registered against one M.S.Suresh and D.Kantharaj who were the Officials of the Opposite party in connection with these officials having cheated the Government and Opposite party in respect of site No.750/A which is in dispute for the offences punishable under section 419, 468, 471, 474 and 420 of I.P.C., and that case is still under investigation. Therefore, the original documents pertaining to that site cannot be returned to the Opposite party. Therefore, having regard to these undisputed facts, it is prima-facie shown that there is serious dispute with regard to the title of site No.750/A and a criminal case is pending in that regard. Therefore, that being the uncontroverted position and in the absence of material documents placed before this Forum it is not possible to decide the Complaint of the Complainant by effective adjudication.<br /> 5. It is further seen that the Complainant along with his grand mother alleged to had purchased the site under Registered Sale Deed dated 25.11.1998 and got the khatha also changed to his name and further admitted that he had given a application to the Opposite party on 17.09.2004 for executing title deed in his favour for which the Opposite party issued an endorsement on 08.11.2004 stating that the relevant documents are in the police custody until those documents are made available they are unable to process that application. After that the Complainant it seems never bothered to take further needed steps, but kept quiet. Therefore, under these circumstances, we are of the view that till the termination of the investigation of the case and a charge sheet if filed the grievance of the Complaint cannot be decided. Therefore for these reasons, we hold that the Complainant under these circumstances is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. With the result, we pass the following order:- <br /> ORDER<br /> <br /> 1. The Complaint is dismissed.<br /> 2. Parties to bear their own costs.<br /> 3. Give a copy of this order to each party according to Rules.<br /> <br />