BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES

REDRESSAL COMMISSION, JALANDHAR.

 Complaint No.312 of 2022

      Date of Instt. 29.08.2022

      Date of Decision: 13.10.2023

Vasdev S/o Sagli Ram R/o 130, Chhoti Baradari, Part-II, Jalandhar previously residing at 31-F, New Baradari, District Jalandhar.

..........Complainant

Versus

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

….….. Opposite Party

Complaint Under the Consumer Protection Act.

Before:        Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj             (President)

                   Smt. Jyotsna                            (Member)

                   Sh. Jaswant Singh Dhillon       (Member)                                          

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

                   Sh. M. S. Sood, Adv. Counsel for OP.

Order

Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj (President)

1.                The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant, wherein it is alleged that the OP has floated a scheme known as Development Scheme Indira Puram situated at Master Gurbanta Singh Enclave Jalandhar and Lucky draw was held on 13.06.2006 at Red Cross- Bhavan, Jalandhar and the complainant was a successful candidate and Jalandhar Improvement Trust had promised complainant to give a best design with all ultra-modern facilities. The complainant was informed by the chairman Jalandhar Improvement Trust Jalandhar vide resolution no.335 dated 30.06.2006 and memo dated 28.07.2006. He was allotted Flat No.249, Ground Floor, Block-A, Development Scheme, Indira Puram, Master Gurbanta Singh Enclave, Jalandhar. As complainant was a successful candidate he received the allotment letter, vide no. 4291 dated 04.09.2006 and Sale Agreement was executed between OP and complainant. The complainant had deposited the total amount of the flat under the terms and conditions as mentioned in the allotment letter, his application number was 32871 and complainant has made full and final payment of Rs.4,51,500/- to the JIT. As per the terms and conditions of the agreement, OP has handed over the possession to the complainant, but not upto the mark/standard. The standard material was not used by OP and other civil amenities were not given to complainant as per the term and conditions as stated in brochure. Therefore, OP has violated the terms and conditions of allotment letter. It is an established law, the promoter is bound to disclose the fixture, fittings and amenities including the provision for one and other more lift provided or to be provided. OP has not raised any development on the spot and material used for construction is also substandard. The complainant has deposited the entire amount as per the terms and conditions and OP will manage the expenditure of the construction and can provide all the civil amenities as per the advertisement given by the OP. There is a gross negligence and deficiency in service on the part of OP. The OP offered the colony/LIG flat fully developed by it and it would have all the facilities of Modern Colony, where water connection, electricity connection and gas connection will be provided by the Developer Builder. But complainant was shocked to find out that construction which was raised at the sight development is of Electricity extremely substandard connection, water connection and gas connection was not provided. Even the pipe of LPG gas line was not laid in the demised premises. There is no street and no proper approach terms and to the property conditions and as per the advertisement. Resultantly the complainant has been misguided by OP. The complainant visited the office of the OP and requested personally and also written application and representation for compliance of terms and conditions. Also a legal notice dated 07.07.2022 was served upon the OP, but all in vain and as such, necessity arose to file the present complaint with the prayer that the complaint of the complainant may be accepted and OPs be directed to refund Rs.4,51,500/- i.e. principal amount which is paid by the complainant to the OP with interest @ 18% per annum from the date 28.09.2006 till date. Further, OP be directed to pay a compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for causing mental tension and harassment to the complainant and Rs.50,000/- as litigation expenses.

2.                Notice of the complaint was given to the OP, who filed reply and contested the complaint by taking preliminary objections that on the application of complainant Flat No.249 GF was allowed in the scheme of Jalandhar Improvement Trust known as Indra Puram (13.96 Acre) (Master Gurbanta Singh Enclave), Jalandhar and the complainant was handed over the possession before mention flat and was duly received by the complainant. It is further averred that the OP duly handed over the possession to the complainant of the flat dispute under signature of the complainant vide possession slip dated 08.07.2010. It is further averred that the complainant was handed over the possession of the flat in dispute in perfect condition and satisfactory working as per the signature of the complainant. The present complaint is hopelessly time bared and has been filed after a laps about 12 yrs. It is further averred that the claim for monetary compensation filed by the complainant is time barred and hence not maintainable before this Forum. The complainant has mislead this Forum and got issued a notice in the present complaint which is barred by law of limitation and operation of law of estoppel. The complaint is liable to be returned as the complainant has not come to the court with clean hands. The complainant is guilty of concealing fact and hence not entitled to any relief from this Court. On merits, all the allegations as made in the complaint are categorically denied and lastly submitted that the complaint of the complainant is without merits, the same may be dismissed.

3.                Rejoinder to the written statement filed by the complainant, whereby reasserted the entire facts as narrated in the complaint and denied the allegations raised in the written statement. 

4.                In order to prove their respective versions, both the parties have produced on the file their respective evidence.

5.                We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also gone through the case file as well as written arguments submitted by counsel for the complainant very minutely.

6.                It is admitted and proved fact that the Flat No.249, Ground Floor, Block-A of the development scheme Indira Puram, Master Gurbanta Singh Enclave, Jalandhar was allotted to the complainant, vide allotment letter dated 04.09.2006, which has been proved as Ex.C2. The complainant has proved on record the receipts showing the payment of the plot made by the complainant to the OP. The receipts and draft have been proved as Ex.C-3 to Ex.C-10. The contention of the complainant is that standard material was not used by the OP and other civil amenities like electricity connection, water connection and gas connection were not provided to the complainant, even gas pipe line was not laid in the demised premises, there is no street and no proper approach to the property as per the terms and conditions as stated in the brochure and the OP has violated the terms and conditions of the allotment letter. Photographs of the Flat and newspaper cutting, which highlighted the conditions and progress in the Flat has been proved on record as Ex.C10-A, Ex.C12 to Ex.C23.

7.                The contention of the OP is that the present complaint is time barred and has been filed after a lapse of about 12 years, but this contention is not tenable as the news publication and photographs have been proved on record by the complainant, which are from Jalandhar Tribune and this is from 2020 onwards, which has been proved as Ex.C-10A and photographs Ex.C-12 to Ex.C-23. This news publication shows that the facilities and development in the Indira Puram is incomplete, meaning thereby there is no development at all. Apart from this, the Status Report dated 08.08.2022 has been proved on record by the complainant as Ex.C-11, whereby it is clear that no amenities and facilities like gas supply, electricity wires, sanitary items were provided by the OP and all taps of kitchen, washroom and Flush are not available and removed and stolen from the said Flat. The doors and windows of the said flat are broken and are in bad condition and the same is not fit for human inhabitation. Even the Commission has held in many other connected cases that the general condition of the area shows that there is no development. The OP has produced on record Possession Slip Ex.OP-1 only, wherein the complainant has stated that the wood work, internal water supply, sewer, electrification and construction work is satisfactory. But this statement seems to have been obtained to complete the paper work. As per photographs and news publications, there is no amenity provided. To rebut this evidence the OP has not produced on record any photograph or document from where it can be ascertained that the portable roads, water/sewerage and street lights etc. have been completed. It has been held by the Hon’ble State Commission, in “Manoj Bagroy Vs. M/s N. H. Matcon” in consumer complaint no.429 of 2019, decided on 07.01.2020 that even if the possession is taken by the consumer, it would be a incomplete and invalid delivery of possession for the want of the amenities. It was observed by the Hon'ble State Commission in the above said case that the OP had not obtained the occupation certificate and completion certificate from the competent authorities to enable them to deliver the complete and effective possession to the allottess. Until and unless they obtain such certificate, it cannot be held that complete possession has been delivered and there is continuous cause of action in favour of the complainant till the obtaining of such certificates by the OP and the complaint filed by the complainant was held to be within limitation. 

8.                The complainant has alleged that the facilities and amenities were not complete and the entire amount was paid by the complainant. As per the allotment letter, the conditions have not complied with by the OPs as the Flats not ready within prescribed period, therefore the fault is on the part of the OPs. Even during the pendency of this complaint, the OP has not brought on the file any cogent and convincing evidence, whereby the OP can establish that they were ready for handing over the possession of the Flat and the same is fit for delivery of possession to the complainant. The OP has not produced the occupation and completion certificate duly issued by the competent authority showing that the basic amenities have been duly provided at the site. Even otherwise, Completion Certificate, as envisaged under section 14 of the Punjab Apartment and Property Regulation Act, 1995 (in Short "PAPRA") is the most essential document, which should have been produced with regard the matter in issue but the same has not been produced by the OP to prove that Flat in question as well as basic amenities in the entire complex have been completed in all respects. In such circumstances, the complainant cannot be made to wait for delivery of possession for an indefinite period and his demand for refund of the amount deposited by him was justified on account of failure of OP to complete the project/flat within the stipulated time period. This fact is also clear from judgment of Hon'ble State Commission, Punjab Chandigarh in First Appeal No.87 of 2020 titled as ‘Jalandhar Improvement Trust versus Mahabir Prasad’ decided on 10.08.2020, wherein it has been held that ‘complainant cannot be made to wait for delivery of possession for an indefinite period and his demand for refund of the amount deposited by him was justified on account of failure of OP to complete the project/fiat within the stipulated time period Even no completion certificate or occupancy certificate has been produced on record by OP to complete the project/flat within the stipulated time period’. Thus, the complainant is entitled for the relief.

9.                In view of the above detailed discussion, the complaint of the complainant is partly allowed and OP is directed to refund the amount of the Flat with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of making deposits till its realization. Further, OP is directed to pay a compensation to the complainant for mental agony and harassment caused to the complainant, to the tune of Rs.30,000/- and litigation expenses of Rs.5000/-. The entire compliance be made within 45 days from the date of receipt of the copy of order. This complaint could not be decided within stipulated time frame due to rush of work.

10.              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          Jaswant Singh Dhillon    Jyotsna               Dr. Harveen Bhardwaj     

13.10.2023         Member                          Member             President