BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.148 of 2015

Date of Instt. 09.04.2015

Date of Decision :21.09.2015

Krishan Lal Kukreja aged about 60 years son of Hardiyal Kukreja, R/o 3, New Rajinder Nagar, Jalandhar.

..........Complainant Versus

1. The Jalandhar Improvement Trust, Jalandhar through its Chairman/ Executive Officer.

2. The Chairman/Executive Officer, Jalandhar Improvement Trust, Jalandhar.

.........Opposite parties.

Complaint Under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: S. Jaspal Singh Bhatia (President)

Ms. Jyotsna Thatai (Member)

Sh.Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh.VK Gupta Adv., counsel for complainant.

Sh.SKS Chhabra Adv., counsel for opposite parties.

Order

J.S.Bhatia (President)

1. The complainant has filed the present complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, against the opposite parties on the averments that the opposite parties have floated a scheme known as Surya Enclave Extension (94.97 Acre) Development Scheme and complainant had applied for the allotment of a plot of 250 sq.yards in Handicapped category as complainant wanted to shit to said plot. Complainant applied for the plot through his banker i.e Punjab National Bank, Main Branch, Jalandhar by paying an amount of Rs.4,25,000/-. Thereafter, on a draw held on 4.11.2011, complainant was allotted the plot No.98-D and was informed about the allotment vide letter No.JIT 4670 dated 2.4.2012. The complainant in pursuance of the terms and conditions of the allotment letter, deposited the 1/4th of the total amount of sale price of the plot on 2.5.2013, vide receipt No.52045 i.e Rs.8,08,450/- towards the first installment including the agreement amount. Complainant has always been ready and willing to perform his part and to deposit the balance sale price of the captioned plot. Complainant visited the site of the scheme area in the month of October 2014 for inspection and verification about the development works at the site of the plot and complainant was shocked and surprised to know that the site of the scheme area was lying in an absolutely ignored condition and there was no touch of development at all at the site in question. Despite much propagation about the development of the scheme area, there was no sign of any development at the site. Even it is not possible to identify and locate the plot in question allotted to complainant at the site nor there were any roads marked or constructed at the scheme site. So much so, even the possession of the scheme area has not been found to be taken by the JIT i.e opposite parties. It has also transpired that the original land holders of the scheme land have not allowed the JIT to take possession of the site in question and they have obtained a stay order against the opposite parties restraining opposite parties from taking possession of the scheme land. It further transpired that original land holders have not been given any amount to compensation by opposite parties and thus the development of the scheme land area could not take place. As such, it has to be concluded that there are no chances of immediate development of the scheme area and of the plot in question, which was required by opposite parties on immediate basis for shifting his residence. On such like averments, the complainant has prayed for directing the opposite party trust to refund Rs.1233450/- to him alongwith interest. He has also claimed compensation and litigation expenses.

2. Upon notice, opposite parties appeared but they did not file any written statement inspite of several opportunities offered to it for this purpose. Consequently, opposite parties were debarred from filing any written statement vide order dated 10.7.2015.

3. In support of his complaint, learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith copies of documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C12 and closed evidence.

4. The opposite party did not lead any rebuttal evidence and same was closed by order vide order dated 8.9.2015. However, thereafter, the opposite party trust filed an affidavit on 9.9.2015 which has been placed on record.

5. We have carefully gone through the record and also heard the learned counsels for the parties.

6. The facts involved in the present case are not much disputed. The complainant was allotted flat No.98-D in Surya Enclave Extension Development Scheme vide allotment letter dated 2.4.2012 Ex.C1. The complainant has deposited Rs.4,25,000/- as earnest money and Rs.8,08,450/- towards the first installment and in this way in all, the complainant has deposited Rs.12,33,450/- with opposite party trust. The grievance of the complainant is that he was always ready and willing to deposit the balance sale price of the above said plot but when he visited the site area, he found that there was no sign of any development at the site and it was found that even trust has not taken possession of the site in question from the land owners and as such there was no chance of development of the scheme area in near future. Counsel for the complainant contended that affidavit filed by the executive officer of the opposite party may be taken into consideration. From the contents of the above affidavit, it is clear that the opposite party is at fault and is not in position to deliver the possession of the plot allotted to the complainant. In the affidavit filed by the executive officer of the trust, it has been mentioned as under:-

"It is pertinent to mention here that the plot No.98-D of 94.97 Acres Scheme falls with Khasra No.9693 and 10108. It is pertinent to mention here that the possession of Khasra No.9693 is still not delivered by the Land Acquisition Collector, and at the spot the said Khasra number is in the possession of Sh.Arjun Singh and other and the litigation qua the said khasra number is pending in the Hon'ble Punjab and Hayana High Court, Chandigarh. As the matter is subjudice before the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh, as such the possession of the khasra number is yet not been delivered to the answering opposite parties by the competent authority, and due to this reason the opposite parties (are) unable to deliver the possession of the property".

7. So from the above contents of the affidavit, it is evident that the plot allotted to the complainant falls in Khasra No.9693 and 10108 and the possession of Khasra No.9693 has not been delivered by the Land Acquisition Collector, and same is in the possession of one Arjun Singh and others and the litigation qua the said khasra number is pending in the Hon'ble High Court. So according to the own admission of the opposite trust, it is not in possession of the entire site/plot allotted to the complainant and is not in position to deliver its possession to him. The complainant can not be be made to wait indefinitely. It is uncertain when the litigation will come to end and what will be its result. So in the above circumstances, it appears that there is no chance of development of scheme area by the trust in near future. When the opposite party trust was not in possession of the entire scheme area then it should not have carved out the scheme and allotted the plot to the various allottees including the complainant. So clearly, the opposite party trust is at fault. Complainant has already paid Rs.1233450/- to the trust and was not supposed to pay remaining amount and stuck his hard earned money in the above said scheme area or allotted plot as the opposite party trust was admittedly not in possession to the entire area of the allotted plot to the complainant. So in these circumstances, we feel that refund of the amount paid by the complainant is an appropriate relief.

8. In view of above discussion, the present complaint is accepted and opposite parties are directed to refund Rs.1233450/- deposited by the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of respective deposits till the date of payment. It is clarified that interest amount is being granted to the complainant by way of compensation. The complainant is also awarded Rs.3000/- on account of litigation expenses. Copies of the order be sent to the parties free of costs under rules. File be consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Jyotsna Thatai Jaspal Singh Bhatia

21.09.2015 Member Member President