BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES
REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.
Complaint No.92 of 2015
Date of Instt. 10.03.2015
Date of Decision : 07.09.2016
Mukta D/o Manjit Kumar R/o 104, Bikrampura, Jalandhar.
..........Complainant
Versus
1.Punjab Urban Development Authority through its Estate Officer, PUDA Complex, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar.
2.Jalandhar Development Authority through Additional Chief Administrator, PUDA Complex, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar.
3.Additional Chief Administrator PUDA, PUDA Complex, Ladowali Road, Jalandhar.
.........Opposite parties
Complaint Under Section 12 of The Consumer Protection Act.
Before: S. Bhupinder Singh (President)
Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)
Present: Sh.Manjit Kumar, Authorized Representative on behalf of complainant.
Sh.AS Saini Adv., counsel for OPs No.1 to 3.
Order
Bhupinder Singh (President)
1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of 'The Consumer Protection Act' against the opposite parties (hereinafter called as OPs) on the averments that the complainant was allotted residential plot No.439 measuring 150 sq.yards in Urban Estate, Kapurthala vide allotment letter dated 7.3.2001. The complainant made the payment of entire price of the aforesaid plot to the OPs by 21.8.2001. The complainant alleges that the OPs did not complete the development work within the assured time framed. As such, complainant was not giving possession of the plot in question with due complete facilities. The OPs admitted the delay in completing the development works, vide letter dated 5.10.2004 extended moratorium period for the purpose of construction of residential plots which shall be taken w.e.f. 12.6.2002. Even the OPs waived off the interest on installments which fell due till June 2002 vide their letter dated 31.5.2005. The OPs have also admitted that the sewer line was connected with the main sewerage on 10.2.2010 vide information in letter dated 27.10.2014. The complainant submitted that all this proves that the OPs completed the sewerage system of the scheme in question on 10.2.2010. So, the OPs could not claim “Non Construction Charges” from the complainant from 12.6.2005 till 10.2.2010 but the OPs charged Rs.1,83,036/- as extension fee on account of “Non Construction Charges” upto 24.10.2013. Total amount of Rs.1,83,036/- on basis of 2 % for the 4th and 5th years, 2.5% for the 6th, 7th and 8th years, 3% for the 9th and 10th year, 3.5% for the 11th and 12th year and 4% for the 13th and 14th year. The OPs have also charged excessive extension fee as “Non Construction Charges” from the complainant as the OPs failed to make all the development work completed upto year 2010. Therefore, only a sum of Rs.65,165/- would have become payable by the complainant to the OPs as against a total sum of Rs.1,83,086/- on account of “Non Construction Charges” upto 31.12.2013. Rather, extension fee would be started from 3 years after 10.2.2010. As such, the complainant is liable to pay Rs.5088. Therefore, the OPs have illegally recovered a sum of Rs.1,77,998/- from the complainant. On such averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the OPs to refund the excessively recovered extension fee amounting to Rs.1,77,998 charged illegally alongwith interest @12% per annum. She has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.
2. Upon notice, OP No.1 appeared through counsel and filed a written reply, pleaded that the complainant has no locus-standi to file the present complaint because she has already sold and transferred the plot in question to Smt.Rajdulari wife of Jagdish Lal R/o 455, Urban Estate, Kapurthala vide transfer letter dated 19.12.2013 and this fact has been concealed by the complainant from this Forum. Moreover, the present complaint is not maintainable as the matter pertains to the demand/payment of extension fee by the PUDA, was an act done in discharge of its statutory obligation under the PUDA Act and regulations framed thereunder. As such, the said demand by PUDA can not be said to be an Act of deficiency in service. The OPs further submitted that all the development work at the site was completed on 12.6.2002. Therefore, a moratorium period of two years was given to all the allotees and the extension fee was charged keeping in view the aforesaid fact from July 2005 onwards under the rules and at the prevailing rates. As per clause 11 of the allotment letter, the allotee is required to take the possession of the plot from the Estate Officer, PUDA within 60 days of the issue of allotment letter. The complainant neither approached the OP with the request of delivery of possession nor shown her intention to raise construction over the site by submission of building plan. So, from the conduct of the complainant, it is clear that she has not purchased the plot for the construction of the house rather for selling the same to earn premium. The complainant deposited the extension fee voluntarily without any protest uptill 24.10.2013 and then there was reselling the same to one Rajdulari. The said Rajdulari immediately after the purchase of plot started construction, which also proves that the complainant had no intention to construct the house but to sell the same to earn profits. The OP further submitted that the sewerage work was completed in 2002. The sewerage was laid in 2002 and it was connected with the main sewer line. The main sewer hole laid down alongwith sewer line, were used for storage of waste as and when they get filled-up, the sewer sullage was used to be removed by way of pumping. As such, due to aforesaid arrangements were not hindrances in carrying out the construction work by the complainant at her plot at the site. The sewerage was connected to the main line on 10.2.2010 after completion of certain formalities with other institutions i.e. Municipal Corporation, Government, and Local Bodies Department, etc. The maturity of the allotee had already completed their construction work before 2010 as there was no hindrances in the sewerage system. The entire development work of laying roads, water supply line, water reservoir tank, sewerage lines were completed by the OP within the period mentioned i.e. till 30.6.2002 and due to this fact moratorium period for construction was given and the interest on installment was waived off. The complainant has never shown her intention from year 2002 till year 2013 to raise the construction over the plot. Rather voluntarily without any protest, deposited the extension fee vide different applications in order to avoid construction with the intention to resell the plot in order to earn profit and premium. The OP denied that due to non availability of basic facilities, the complainant could not raise the construction and that she was forced to pay the “Non Construction Charges”. However, the complainant did not make any effort to raise construction. She never applied for water connection, sewerage connection or electric connection, just to raise construction over the plot in question. Rather, she purchased the plot for earning premium and paid “Non Construction Charges” voluntarily without any protest and she sold the plot to one Smt.Rajdulari wife of Jagdish Lal R/o 455, Urban Estate, Kapurthala and got transferred the plot in question in the name of transferee Smt.Rajdulari from the OP vide letter dated 19.12.2013 and this fact has been concealed by the complainant in her complaint. OPs further submitted that the seller sold the property particularly immovable property with its rights and liabilities to the purchaser. Therefore, after selling the plot in question to the said Rajdulari, the complainant has been left with no right or interest in or attached with the property in question. The complainant has sold the property in question to said Smt.Rajdulari and the same was transferred in the name of Rajdulari vide letter of the OP dated 19.12.2013.
3. In support of her complaint, authorized representative on behalf of complainant has tendered into evidence affidavits Ex.CA and Ex.CB alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C16 and closed evidence.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the OPs has tendered affidavit Ex.O-1 alongwith copy of document Ex.O-2 and evidence of OPs was closed by order.
5. We have heard the Ld. counsel for the parties, minutely gone through the record and have appreciated the evidence produced on record by both the parties with the valuable assistance of Ld. counsels for the parties.
6. From the record i.e. pleadings of the parties and the evidence produced on record by both the parties, it is clear that the complainant was allotted residential plot No.439 measuring 150 sq.yards in Urban Estate, Kapurthala vide allotment letter dated 7.3.2001 Ex.C2. The complainant made the payment of entire price of the aforesaid plot to the OPs by 21.8.2001 (total price of the plot in question was Rs.2,77,500/-). The complainant alleges that the OPs did not complete the development work within the assured time framed. As such, complainant was not giving possession of the plot in question with due complete facilities. The OPs admitted the delay in completing the development works, vide letter dated 5.10.2004 Ex.C3 extended moratorium period for the purpose of construction of residential plots which shall be taken w.e.f. 12.6.2002. Even the OPs waived off the interest on installments which fell due till June 2002 vide their letter dated 31.5.2005 Ex.C4. The OPs have also admitted that the sewer line was connected with the main sewerage on 10.2.2010 vide information in letter dated 27.10.2014 Ex.C5. So, all this proves that the OPs completed the sewerage system of the scheme in question on 10.2.2010. So, the OPs could not claim “Non Construction Charges” from the complainant from 12.6.2005 till 10.2.2010 but the OPs charged Rs.1,83,036/- as extension fee on account of “Non Construction Charges” upto 24.10.2013, total amount of Rs.1,83,036/- on basis of 2 % for the 4th and 5th years, 2.5% for the 6th, 7th and 8th years, 3% for the 9th and 10th year, 3.5% for the 11th and 12th year and 4% for the 13th and 14th year. The OPs have also charged excessive extension fee as “Non Construction Charges” from the complainant as the OPs failed to make all the development work completed upto year 2010. Therefore, only a sum of Rs.65,165/- would have become payable by the complainant to the OPs as against a total sum of Rs.1,83,086/- on account of “Non Construction Charges” upto 31.12.2013. Rather, extension fee could be started from 3 years after 10.2.2010. As such, the complainant is liable to pay Rs.5088. Therefore, the OPs have illegally recovered a sum of Rs.1,77,998/- from the complainant. The complainant submitted that all this amounts to deficiency of service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant.
7. Whereas the case of the OP is that the complainant has no locus-standi to file the present complaint because she has already sold and transferred the plot in question to Smt.Rajdulari wife of Jagdish Lal R/o 455, Urban Estate, Kapurthala vide transfer letter dated 19.12.2013 Ex.O2 and this fact has been concealed by the complainant from this Forum. Moreover, the present complaint is not maintainable as the matter pertains to the demand/payment of extension fee by the PUDA, was an act done in discharge of its statutory obligation under the PUDA Act and regulations framed thereunder. As such, the said demand by PUDA can not be said to be an act of deficiency in service. The OPs further submitted that all the development work at the site was completed on 12.6.2002. Therefore, a moratorium period of two years was given to all the allotees and the extension fee was charged keeping in view the aforesaid fact from July 2005 onwards under the rules and at the prevailing rates. As per clause 11 of the allotment letter Ex.C2, the allotee is required to take the possession of the plot from the Estate Officer, PUDA within 60 days of the issue of allotment letter. The complainant neither approached the OP with the request of delivery of possession nor had shown her intention to raise construction over the site by submission of building plan. So, from the conduct of the complainant, it is clear that she has not purchased the plot for the construction of the house rather for selling the same to earn premium. The complainant deposited the extension fee voluntarily without any protest uptill 24.10.2013 and then there was reselling the same to one Rajdulari. The said Rajdulari immediately after the purchase of plot started construction, which also proves that the complainant had no intention to construct the house but to sell the same to earn profits. The OP further submitted that the sewerage work was completed in 2002. The sewerage was laid in 2002 and it was connected with the main sewer line. The main sewer-hole laid down alongwith sewer line, were used for storage of waste and as and when they get filled-up, the sewer sullage was used to be removed by way of pumping. As such, due to the aforesaid arrangements there was no hindrances in carrying out the construction work by the complainant at her plot at the site. The sewerage was connected to the main line on 10.2.2010 after completion of certain formalities with other institutions i.e. Municipal Corporation, Government in Local Bodies Department, etc. The majorities of the allotees had already completed their construction work before 2010 as there was no hindrance in the sewerage system. The entire development works of laying roads, water supply line, water reservoir tank, sewerage lines were completed by the OP within the period mentioned i.e. till 30.6.2002 and due to this fact moratorium period for construction was given and the interest on installment was waived off till 30.6.2002. The complainant had never shown her intention from year 2002 till year 2013 to raise the construction over the plot. Rather voluntarily, without any protest, deposited the extension fee vide different applications in order to avoid construction with the intention to resell the plot in order to earn profit and premium. The OP denied that due to non availability of basic facilities, the complainant could not raise the construction and that she was forced to pay the “Non Construction Charges”. However, complainant did not make any effort to raise construction. She never applied for water connection, sewerage connection or electric connection, just to raise construction over the plot in question. Rather, she purchased the plot for earning premium and paid “Non Construction Charges” voluntarily without any protest and she sold the plot to one Smt.Rajdulari wife of Jagdish Lal R/o 455, Urban Estate, Kapurthala and got transferred the plot in question transferred in the name of transferee Smt.Rajdulari from the OP vide letter dated 19.12.2013 Ex.O2 and this fact has been concealed by the complainant in her complaint. Learned counsel for the OP further submitted that the seller sells the property particularly the immovable property with all its rights and liabilities to the purchaser. Therefore, after selling the plot in question to said Rajdulari, the complainant has been left with no right or interest in or attached with the property in question. The complainant has sold the property in question to said Smt.Rajdulari and the same was transferred in the name of Rajdulari vide letter of the OP dated 19.12.2013 Ex.O2. So, since 19.12.2013 the complainant has no locus-standi to file the present complaint. Learned counsel for the OPs submitted that there is no deficiency of service on the part of the OPs qua the complainant, rather it is a misuse of the process of this Forum as well as law.
8. From the entire above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that the complainant purchased the plot in question from the OP and the same was allotted to the complainant vide allotment letter dated 7.3.2001 Ex.C1 and the complainant was required to take the possession of the plot in question within 60 days from the date of allotment letter. As per this allotment letter, the complainant was to raise construction over the plot in question within three years from the date of allotment letter of the plot i.e. 7.3.2001. As such, the complainant was required to complete the construction over the plot in question by 7.3.2004. However, the OP could not complete the development work and the development work was completed at the site on 12.6.2002, therefore, moratorium period was given to all the allottees and the extension fee/non construction charges were charged from the allotees keeping in view the aforesaid fact from July 2005 onwards and not from 7.3.2004. Not only this, the interest on the installments for the aforesaid moratorium period was also waived by the OP. The OP completed the entire development work on 12.6.2002. As such, the OP gave time to the allotees (including complainant) to complete the construction work over their respective plots by July 2005, failing which the “Non Construction Charges” shall be charged at the prevailing rates from July 2005 onwards. The complainant did not raise the construction over the plot in question. So, she was charged “Non Construction Charges” and the complainant voluntarily deposited the extension fee without any protest uptill 24.10.2013. The plea of the complainant that she was illegally charged “Non Construction Charges” from July 2005 onwards because the OP did not complete the development work at the site as they connected sewerage lines of the locality to the main sewerage line on 10.2.2010. So, the OP could not charge “Non Construction Charges” from the complainant prior to 10.2.2010 rather the construction period of three years was to be given to the complainant/allotees from 10.2.2010 till 10.2.2013 and the “Non Construction Charges” are payable by the allotees from 10.2.2013 onwards. As such, the OP has illegally charged “Non Construction Charges” from July 2005 to 10.2.2013. Here we do not agree with this contention of the complainant because the OP has laid down the sewerage lines in the year 2002. The main holes were laid down alongwith sewerage line and storage of waste were completed whenever the said storage get filled-up, the sewer sullage was used to be removed by way of pumping and there was no hindrance in the sewerage system/sewerage facility to the allotees and other allotees have raised construction over their respective plots. However, the connection of sewerage to the main line was done on 10.2.2010 after seeking permission from Municipal Authorities/ Government in Local Bodies Department, Punjab, etc. but there was no hindrance in the sewerage system which has been working at the site since 2002 when the sewerage was laid at the site and the same was connected with the main sewerage line and storage of waste was prepared by the OP in 2002. The complainant never applied for sewerage connection, water connection or electric connection to raise construction over the plot in question, rather she deposited extension fee/non construction charges upto 2013 voluntarily without any protest. The complainant never applied for sewerage connection, so how can she state that the sewerage system was not working at the site before 10.2.2010? All this rather proves that the complainant had no intention to raise construction over the plot in question. She has purchased this plot with an intention to resell the same to get profit/ premium that is why she voluntarily deposited the “Non Construction Charges” without any protest and ultimately in the year 2013, she sold the plot to one Smt.Rajdulary wife of Jagdish Lal and the complainant got transferred the said plot in the name of said Rajdulari from the OP vide letter dated 19.12.2013 Ex.O2 and all these facts were concealed by the complainant in her complaint. The complainant had already sold this plot to said Smt.Rajdulari and got transferred the same in the name of said Smt.Rajdulari vide letter dated 19.12.2013 Ex.O2, as such, complainant was left with no right or interest in or attached with the plot in question since 19.12.2013 and she filed the present complaint on 10.3.2015 fully knowing that complainant had no right or interest attached with the plot in question since 19.12.2013. So, the complainant has also no right to file the present complaint in the year 2015 regarding the plot in question when she had already sold the same alongwith all rights and liabilities attached with that plot, to one Smt.Rajdulari on 19.12.2013 vide transfer letter Ex.O2.
9. In view of above discussion, we hold that there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of cost, under rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Dated Parminder Sharma Bhupinder Singh
07.09.2016 Member President
