BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL FORUM, JALANDHAR.

Complaint No.411 of 2015

Date of Instt. 18.09.2015

Date of Decision: 06.06.2017

Nasib Kaur W/o S. Piara Singh R/o 418/2, Shastri Nagar, Majitha Road, Amritsar. ..........Complainant

Versus

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

.........Opposite party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before: Sh. Karnail Singh, (President)

Sh. Parminder Sharma (Member)

Present: Sh. Darshan Singh, Adv. Counsel for the complainant.

Sh. Manoj Dhamija, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Karnail Singh (President)

1. This complaint filed by complainant, wherein alleged that the opposite party had floated a scheme known as Surya Enclave Extension 94.97 Acre Scheme in Jalandhar. Complainant had applied for allotment of 200 Sq. Yards under Pensionary Category as prospective buyer and Lucky draw was held on 04.11.2011 at Red Cross Bhavan, Jalandhar and Sh. Baljit Singh Neela Mahal was Chairman of Jalandhar Improvement Trust at that time. Complainant was a successful candidate and the Jalandhar Improvement Trust had promised to give best design with all ultra model facility. The complainant was informed by the Chairman Jalandhar Improvement Trust Jalandhar vide resolution No.335 dated 08.11.2011 and memo No.8/31/11(9)-1 SS2/3213 dated 07.12.2011. She was allotted 288-D, covering area 200 Sq. Yrds. Under the category of pensioner. Complainant was a successful candidate and received the allotment letter, vide No.4635 dated 02.04.2012. The sale agreement was executed between the parties and she had deposited the total amount of the plot under the terms and conditions as mentioned in the allotment letter, her application number was 078153 and complainant has made full and final payment to the improvement trust, Jalandhar but the OP has handed over the possession of the plot in question on dated 04.09.2015, after a long period, from the due date of handing over the possession to the complainant. But OP neither made the compliance of the letter vide No.66-I-30I-83/7070-7090 dated 23.02.1983, issued by Deputy Secretary, Local Department, nor reply the legal notice dated 07.09.2015 send by the complainant to OP.

2. That complainant and her husband Piara Singh had visited the plot No.288-D allotted to her, as per scheme by Surya Enclave Extension 94.97 Acre Scheme in Jalandhar and also visited the office of the Jalandhar Improvement Trust and came to know that there are 11 writs pending in Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh and detail of this writs are given below:-

3. That as per the personal visit of complainant and her husband to site of the plot No.288-D in Surya Enclave Extension Development Scheme in Jalandhar and observed that this area in question, related to plot No.288-D are not in developed position as per the terms and conditions of the allotment letter as detail is given in para No.7 and civil Amenities/public utilities service, supply of water, construction of road, supply of powers and light and lay down of the sewerage and roads are not as per the terms and conditions of the noticee. The real and factual position of the work and conduct are very unreasonable and unjustified as per the terms and conditions, because OP has failed to perform its contractual obligation and gross violation of the statutory rules and administrative instructions, which amounts to gross negligence and deficiency in service. Complainant, who is a pensioner and have to face great hardship, harassment, mental tension, physical pain, agony and in-convenience to complainant. It is specifically mentioned here that complainant has no other source of income except the pension.

4. That complainant is the permanent resident of District Amritsar and after retirement as P.T.I Teacher, from Education Department, has decided to shift from Amritsar to Jalandhar with this intention, complainant has applied for 200 Sq. Yrds of plot in Surya Enclave Extension, in which she was the successful candidate and paid the entire amount from all the saving of her life and also all the pensionary benefits, paid for this plot No.288-D, Surya Enclave Jalandhar. Complainant wants to start construction immediately on plot No.288-D, but due to lack of civil amenities and development work which was not provided by OP, so she could not start the construction on this plot. It is specifically mentioned that price index of construction material has gone up, and construction become more costly and it is also stated that construction of the plot in question is mandatory and to be constructed in Three Years. In the net result, complainant have to spend more money on construction. The development facilities and development work at Surya Enclave Extension is still not complete, but work has to be completed by OP within 2 ½ years, as per the allotment letter No.4635 dated 02.04.2012 of J.I.T Jalandhar. It is of the above letter that development work and other facilities will have to provide within 2 ½ years but still OP has not started the development facilities, even after a period of more than 11 months, even after getting the full and final payment, which amounts to gross negligence, and deficiency in service and as such necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and directed the OP to pay compensation/damages to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/- with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of deposit the amount by the complainant i.e. 02.10.2014 till date and further OP be directed to pay cost of processing of the complaint to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and any other alternative relief be also granted to the complainant.

5. Notice of the complaint was given to the opposite party and accordingly the opposite party appeared through counsel and filed reply, whereby contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form nor under the law. The complaint is also false and frivolous of the knowledge of the answering OP and further alleged that the complainant is trying to harass the answering OP by filing present complaint and even the complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint and even the complainant has concealed the material facts from the Forum and further alleged that the complainant has made false and fabricated allegations and made a self story just to get illegal benefit with some malafide intention. Had she wanted to start construction immediately, she would have complied with Para No.9 and 10 of the allotment letter. Construction is to be started after getting site plan sanctioned, as para No.9 and the water connection is to be applied after sanction of site plan on application and payment of requisite fee and sewage connection would be given after completion of the construction, as per Para No.10, the complainant herself has not got the site plan sanctioned and has not applied for water connection. She herself is not interested in raising construction. The answering OP would have been liable, if they had violated terms of allotment by refusing water or sewage connection, but in present case, the complainant is herself at fault and making false excuses and as such the present complaint is not maintainable. On merits, the allotment of the plot of the complainant is admitted but the remaining allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly prayed the complaint of the complainant is without merit and same may be dismissed.

6. In order to prove the case of the complainant, the attorney of the complainant Piara Singh tendered into evidence affidavit Ex.CA alongwith documents Ex. C1 to Ex.C14 and closed the evidence of the complainant.

7. Similarly, counsel for OP tendered into evidence affidavit of Paramjit Singh Raipur as Ex.OP/A and closed the evidence.

8. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also gone through the case file very minutely.

9. After considering the over all circumstances as submitted before us, we came to conclusion that the factum in regard to allotment of one plot bearing No.288-D to the complainant from Surya Enclave Extension 94.97 Acre Scheme in Jalandhar is not disputed. The said plot was given to the complainant in a Lucky Draw conducted on 04.11.2011 and then allotment letter dated 02.04.2012 was issued to the complainant which is Ex.C1 and thereafter an agreement was executed between the parties i.e. Complainant and OP which is Ex.C2 but as per the allegation of the complainant that the OP has required to handover the possession of the plot in question immediately after the allotment i.e. from 02.04.2012 but actual possession was handed over to the complainant on 04.09.2015, after about 3 years and this delay of handing over the possession caused a great loss to the complainant because the complainant has to raise a construction on the plot for residential purpose but the prices of the building material was rise more than 10 times from 2012 to 2015, which caused a mental harassment and financial loss to the complainant.

10. The version of the complainant that the possession was handed over to the complainant after about 3 years of the date of allotment and these factum are established by way of documentary evidence. For reference sake, we take an opportunity to refer a letter Ex.C-9 bearing No.1906 dated 06.08.2015, wrote by Executive Officer, Improvement Trust, Jalandhar to the Chief Vigilance Officer-cum-Noddle Officer and in this letter, it is categorically mentioned that the plot No.288-D allotted to complainant Nasib Kaur, it falls in Khasra No.8843 and 8844. The possession of the said Khasra has not been given to the Trust by L.A.C. except that the possession of other plots were given to the other allottess. Similarly, there is an other letter bearing No.2503 dated 07.10.2014 Ex.C-10, wherein also categorically mentioned that the plot No.288-D allotted to complainant, falls in Khasra No.8843 and 8844. The possession of the aforesaid Khasra has not been handed over to the Trust by the Land Collector. So, it is clearly established from two aforesaid letters of the OP that possession of the plot No.288-D given to the complainant on 09.04.2015, after much delay and as such there is obviously a deficiency on the part of the OP.

11. Apart from above, the other allegation of the complainant is that the OP has to provide all the amenities and facilities to the allottee within 2 ½ year from the date of allotment i.e. 02.04.2012 but till today the development work is not complete and this factum is established from a letter Ex.C-9, wherein Para No.4, it is categorically mentioned that the development work is still going on and regarding that the complete information can be provided after some time and further the information provided by the OP alongwith the reply of the application for production of documents i.e. C-12, a detailed report has been submitted and wherein it is categorically established that the entire development work is still not complete, this report is dated 23.05.2016. So, it means the development work of the said scheme has yet not been completed till the date of filing of the complaint rather even till 23.05.2016, the same is not completed.

12. No doubt the OP has taken a simple plea that the complainant has to get a site plan got sanctioned from the OP and then raise a construction but till today the OP has not got sanctioned a site plan and after construction the water connection and sewerage connection is to be given to the allottee/complainant but this version of the OP is not a trust-worthy because if the development work is not completed on the spot and moreover, the possession was handed over to the complainant after three years from the date of allotment then how it is possible for the complainant to raise construction. So, it is clearly established that there is a tantamount delay on the part of the OP for delivery of possession to the complainant as well as not providing a development work like electricity, roads, sewerage system and lighting system and thus we came to conclusion that there is a deficiency in service on the part of the OP and as such complainant is entitled for the relief.

13. In view of above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly accepted and OP is directed to complete the development work i.e. water supply, lay-down of sewage, construction of road, supply of electricity, development of park and plantation of trees and removal of any kind on encroachment, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order and further OP is directed to pay compensation to the complainant for mental harassment to the tune of Rs.50,000/- and further directed to pay litigation expenses of Rs.10,000/-. The entire aforesaid amount of Rs.60,000 be paid to the complainant within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of order failing which the complainant will entitle to get interest thereon @ 9% per annum from the date of filing the complaint till realization. Complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

14. Copies of the order be supplied to the parties free of cost, as per Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the record room.

Dated Parminder Sharma Karnail Singh

06.06.2017 Member President