Orissa

Cuttak

CC/151/2015

Niranjan Bal - Complainant(s)

Versus

Secretary,Cuttack Developement Authority - Opp.Party(s)

P Mohanty

27 Jun 2017

ORDER

IN THE COURT OF THE DIST. CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,CUTTACK.

C.C No.151/2015

 

Niranjan Bal,

Plot No.2F/704,C.D.A,Sector-10,

P.S:Markat Nagar,Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                      … Complainant.

 

                Vrs.

 

Cuttack Development Authority, (CDA),

At:Arundoya Bhawan,PO:Arundoya Market,

Link Road,Town/Dist:Cuttack.                                                   … Opp. Party.

 

Present:              Sri Dhruba Charan Barik,President.

Sri Bichitra Nanda Tripathy, Member.

Smt. Sarmistha Nath, Member (W).

 

Date of filing:     21.12.2015. 

Date of Order:   27.06.2017.

 

For the complainant        :       Sri P.Mohanty,Adv. & Associates.

For the O.P.                       :       M/s. S.Swain,Adv. & Associates.

 

Sri Bichitra Nanda Tripathy, Member.

                The case is against O.Ps for deficiency in service.

1. Shortly the case is that the complainant applied for allotment of a plot bearing No.11-2CM-887 at Sector-11,CDA as per terms and conditions as specified in the broacher issued for the purpose.  The complainant deposited the requisite fees on 15.11.2007 but the said plot could not be allotted in favour of the complainant.  Being aggrieved by such action of the O.P, the complainant filed a writ petition which was disposed on 23.12.2009 with a direction to file a representation before the O.P.  who will consider the same and take a decision in accordance with law.  On 05.01.2010 the complainant requested the O.P to allot a vacant plot bearing No.10-6CM-1627/C available in Sector-10,CDA,Cuttack.  But the O.P decided to allot a plot in favour of the complainant bearing No.13-2CM-523 in Sector-13 subject to the condition that the stay order would vacate.  But the complainant again requested the O.P for allotment of plot No.10-6CM-523 in Section-10,CDA as per prevailing rate fixed by CDA.  The O.P tried to auction the said plot.  The petitioner approached the Hon’ble Court in W.P.(C) No.23462 of 2011 for a direction to allot the plot as per representation dt.29.12.2010.  Hon’ble Court directed to deposit a sum of Rs.45,000/- and the O.P. shall not put to auction for sale of the said plot.  Accordingly the petitioner deposited the said amount of Rs.45,000/- as per order of the Hon’ble Court and also orally requested to adjust the previously deposited amount of Rs.18,524/- treating the same as earnest price for the said bid.  The said writ petition was finally disposed of on 09.12.2011 with an observation that the petitioner will offer higher amount than the highest bid for the said plot and the authority (O.P) will consider the same.  The highest bid was received by the O.P. was Rs.58 lakhs.  But it confirmed through RTI information dt.07.05.2012 that the highest bidder to plot No.10-6CM-1627/C has withdrawn himself from the auction and has taken back his deposited amount.  The petitioner opted before the O.P to take the said plot and offered a higher amount i.e. Rs.58,04,000/- over and above the highest bid made by the auction holder i.e. Rs.58,00,000/-.  On 07.01.2013 the O.P vide letter No.282 intimated the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.62,85,258/- wherein a sum of Rs.5,42,782/- was charged towards interest and initial deposit of Rs.61,524/- was deducted.  On 06.02.2013, petitioner submitted a representation that due to his illness he is not able to arrange such huge amount and prayed for some more time.  He also deposited a sum of Rs.7,49,900/- on 06.02.2013.  O.P. allured time to the complainant till 08.05.2013 on 21.02.2013.  But the complainant again requested for further time vide his letter dt.07.03.2013 and deposited Rs.54,00,000/- on 25.03.2013 and submitted vide representation dt.25.03.2013 that the amount directed to be deposited by CDA was illegal and such amount was deposited under protest.  CDA claimed further interest worth Rs.1,99,640/- and the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.62,85,258/- in toto.  On 16.04.2013 CDA intimated the petitioner about allotment of the plot.  Auction purchaser possession letter handed over to the petitioner vide office order No.10849 dt.23.04.2013.  The petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.300/- as documentation charges and ground rent was deposited on 26.04.2013 by the petitioner.  The O.Ps received an amount worth Rs.64,13,370/- against the auction price of Rs.58,04,000/-.  Thus the excess price paid by the petitioner towards interest amounting to Rs.6,09,070/- is illegal and without any valid reason.  The petitioner suffered from serious health problems for which he needed money and was forced to sale the said plot.  On 05.08.2013 he submitted an application for transfer of the said plot and on 13.09.2013 such transfer was approved and the date for such transfer was fixed on 21.09.2013.  On 31.01.2014 the O.P. again directed the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs.6,34,678/- towards transfer fees which was deposited by the petitioner on 28.02.2014 under protest.  Again on 25.03.2014 the O.Ps directed to deposit a sum of Rs.1,26,936/- towards registration fees which was also deposited by the complainant under protest.  Thus the complainant paid a sum of Rs.7,63,617/- towards transfer charges and  registration cost.  As per decision taken vide meeting No.4/94 dt.05.02.2011 of the O.Ps “Once the auction of commercial plot is made, the auction price considered as market price and for all purpose this should not be taken as the price of the plot.  Any extra premium should not be charged towards 3^rd party transfer in case applied within one year from the date of auction or a month ending of March which even is earlier.  The possession handed over to the petitioner on 23.04.2013 and the date of transfer was fixed on 21.09.2013 which comes under one financial year.  Thus the amount received by the O.P towards registration and transfer charges was illegal and needs to be recovered with interest.  The complainant has taken shelter of this Hon’ble Forum.  He has prayed to direct the O.P to refund the complainant a sum of Rs.7,63,617/- which was taken by the O.P towards transfer and registration charges along with 12% interest, Rs.20,000/- towards mental agony and Rs.20,000/- towards litigation cost, Rs.10,000/- towards deficiency in service.  Thus he has claimed a total amount of Rs.8,13,617/- from the O.P.
2.  The O.,P vide written version dt.18.08.2016    Has intimated that as per order dt.09.12.2011 passed in W.P ( C ) No.23462/2011 a commercial plot bearing No.10-6CM-1627/C (4000 Sft.) was allotted in favour of the complainant on 16.04.2013.  Accordingly the complainant paid the entire cost of the plot i.e. Rs.58,04,000/- along with interest thereon.  Possession of the plot was handed over to the complainant on 24.04.2013. (Copy of judgment dt.09.12.2011 enclosed vide Annexure-A).  On 05.08.2013, the complainant applied for a transfer in the ownership.  C.D.A allowed him to transfer the ownership of said vacant land to a 3^rd party since he was in need of money for treatment of his mother and for repayment of his loan.  The complainant was intimated vide letter No.1971 dt.31.01.2014 to deposit a sum of Rs.6,34,678/- towards Administration and processing fees and Rs.2003/- towards paper publication charges for the purpose and on 28.02.2014 the complainant deposited such amount with the O.P. (copy of 3^rd party application dt.05.05.2013, (CDA letter No.1971 dt.31.01.2014 and protest application are annexed vide annexure-B,C & D respectively).  The decision taken in the 94^th Authority meeting dt.05.02.2011 was relating to transfer of commercial plots and the same is enclosed vide Annexure-E. In the present case the application for 3^rd party transfer was made on 05.08.2013 i.e. one year after the judgment dt.09.12.2011 passed in W.P( C ) No.23462/11.  The date of order of the court was taken as date of Auction and since it was not within one year from the date of auction (date of judgment of Hon’ble Court) Administration and processing fees were charged vide CDA letter dt.31.10.2014.

The complainant was intimated to deposit Rs.1,26,936/- towards registration fees vide letter dt.25.03.2014(Annexure-F) and the complainant had deposited the same on 26.03.2014(Annexure-G).

3. We have gone through the case in details.  Perused the documents as filed by the complainant and as well as by the O.P.  Heard the advocates from both sides at length.  The Hon’ble High Court vide order dt.09.12.2011 in the W.P ( C ) No.23462 of 2011 has ordered that “so far as the plot in Sector-10 is concerned, highest bid so far received by the authority is Rs.58,00,000/-, if the petitioner(the complainant ) offers a higher amount than the above, the Authority may consider his case for allotment of the said plot in Sector-10” challenging the said order  the petitioner moved before the Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP (C ) No.8160 of 2012 and the said SLP was withdrawn on 08.05.2012 after knowing that the highest bidder of plot No.10-6 CM-1627/C have withdrawn from the auction and have taken back his deposit amount.  The petitioner applied before the O.P on 17.07.2012 for taking the said plot and offered an amount of Rs.58,04,000/- for the said plot on 19.11.2012.  Thus the complainant offered to deposit Rs.58,04,000/- with the O.P  which was after more than 11 months of the order of the Hon’ble High Court given for the purpose.  On 07.01.2013 the O.P asked him to deposit the cost of plot along with interest as payable for the purpose and the complainant made final payment for the said plot on 25.03.2013 and the interest amount was paid on 26.03.2013.  He was allotted the plot on 16.04.2013 and the possession handing over memo was issued on 23.04.2013.  The complainant required money urgently for which he applied to the O.P for transfer of the said plot to a 3^rd party on 02.08.2013.  O.P allowed such transfer on 31.01.2014.  The plot i.e. 10-6CM-1627/C was auctioned earlier and by depositing more amount than the highest bid the complainant was entitled for the plot as per orders of Hon’ble High Court.    We have observed that there was no separate auction made for the said plot and the complainant was entitled to get the said plot basing on the orders of Hon’ble High Court and the date of such order of Hon’ble High Court was 09.12.2011. Hence, the date of such order of Hon’ble High Court i.e. 09.12.2011 is to be treated as date of auction. The complainant should have initiated necessary steps to deposit the required cost with CDA and could have applied for 3^rd party transfer before the completion of one year from the date of order of Hon’ble High Court which he has failed.

                                                                                                        ORDER

Basing on the facts and circumstances and to meet the ends of justice it is observed that the complainant has failed to prove the deficiency in service on the part of O.P.  Hence the case is dismissed.

Typed to dictation, corrected and pronounced by the Hon’ble Member in the Open Court on this the 27^th   day of June,2017 under the seal and signature of this Forum.

 

                                                                                                                                       (Sri B.N.Tripathy )

                                                                                                                                             Member.

 

 

                                                                                                                                        (   Sri D.C.Barik  )

                                                                                                                                              President.

 

                                                                                                                                               

                                                                                                                                          (Smt. Sarmistha Nath) 

                                                                                                                                      Member(W).