Back
2007 (1) CPR 361
PUNJAB STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHANDIGARH
R.S. Mongia, President; C.P. Budhiraja and Mrs. Jasbir Kapoor, Members
Punjab Urban Development Authority
& Anr.—Appellants
versus
Upjeet Singh Brar—Respondent
First Appeal No. 1318 of 2005
Decided on 22-12-2006
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Appellants:Shri Balwinder Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shir Vivek Suri, Advocate.
IMPORTANT POINT
Where in terms of allotment of a residential plot extension beyond a certain period was a concession and when extension was granted subject to terms and conditions which allottee accepted, he could not be permitted to turn back and challenge the conditions.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — Sections 12 and 17 — Allotment of plot —Charging of non-construction fee — Complainant challenging the fee paid — Plot was allotted in1974 and it was transferred from one person to another till it was transferred in name of complainant’s father in 1994 — As per terms in allotment letter construction was to be completed in three years from date of allotment — Complainant father kept on depositing non-construction fee till 1997 — On death of complainant’s father plot was transferred in complainant’s name — Appellant decided to grant extension in construction period subject to certain conditions—Complainant complying those conditions deposited arrears of extension fee of Rs. 2,79,500 and then filed complaint alleging that no construction fee was chargeable—District Forum allowed complaint—Appeal—Extension beyond 8 years was a matter of concession which was to be granted on terms and conditions—Complainant having accepted such terms and conditions could not turn back and challenge the extension fee—Impugned order was liable to be set aside. (Para 5)
Result: Appeal allowed.
R. S. Mongia, President—This is an appeal by PUDA against the order of the District Forum dated 24.8.2005 by which the complaint of the complainant was accepted. Only relevant facts, which may be necessary to dispose of this appeal, may be noticed.
2. A plot No. 501 measuring 500 sq yds. in phase No.1, Urban Estate, Model Town, Bathinda, was allotted to one Sukhdev Singh (wrongly mentioned in the order as Sukhchain Singh) by the Punjab Housing Development Board now PUDA on 19.3.1974 for a sum of Rs.15,750. It was being transferred from one person to another and before transferring it to the complainant the same had been transferred in the name of his father, Dhanad Singh on 18.1.1994. As per the stipulation in the allotment letter the construction on the plot was to be completed within a period of 3 years from the date of allotment. As per the relevant rules/ regulations of PUDA, if the construction is not completed within the stipulated period, some non-construction fee on certain rates is leviable. Under the rules and regulations the extension which can be granted is for 5 years. Though under the rules and regulations and as per the allotment letter the extension could only be granted for a maximum period of 5 years after the initial period of 3 years allowed by the allotment letter yet it seems that in this case extension had been granted upto the year 1997 and predecessor in interest of the complainant i.e. father of the complainant even paid the non-construction fee upto the year 1997 without any demur. Thereafter there is nothing on the record that any extension was granted. A notice was sent on 3.1.2000 by PUDA to the predecessor in interest i.e. complainant’s father for depositing Rs. 49,500 as non-construction fee from 1997 to 1999. However, the said notice was received back with the remarks of the postal authorities that the person had died and, therefore, the letter was being sent back to PUDA, Again on 26.4.2000, a notice for depositing Rs.76,000 was sent depicting the non-construction fee. Later on, it was mentioned in the letter dated 22.3.2002 that on payment of Rs.1,16,450 the period of construction would stand extended for the last time up to 30.6.2002. Another letter dated 12.12.2003 followed in which total demand of Rs.1,72,800 was made by PUDA in which details have been given as to how that figure had been arrived at which included the amount for the extension fee from the year 1999 onwards. On the death of the complainant’s father the plot had been transferred in the name of the complainant on 30.3.2005, though Dhanad Singh, father of the complainant had died somewhere in the year 1999-2000 as the letter dated 18.1.2000 sent by the PUDA came back to the PUDA that the addressee is dead, PUDA decided to grant extension in construction period in various urban estates of PUDA and for that purpose issued a letter dated 21.3.2005 to all Additional Chief Administrators, PUDA, all Estate Officers, PUDA informing about the decision. The letter reads as under:
“PUNJAB URBAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MOHALI
To
All Additional Chief Administrators,
PUDA,
Mohali, Ludhiana, Jalandhar, Patiala & Bathinda,
All Estate Officers, PUDA,
Mohali, Ludhiana, Jalandhar, Patiala, Bathinda, Amritsar & Ferozepur.
No. PUDA-Policy-UE1-2005/1194-1205
Dated: 21.3.2005
Subject: Grant of extension in construction period for residential/commercial plots in various Urban Estates of PUDA.
Ref.: In continuation of this office letter No.1173-84 dated 21.4.2004.
On the above noted subject, the matter regarding grant of extension for construction of building to those allottees who had already availed maximum period of 5 years of extension, has been considered in detail and it is decided in public interest to allow extension one more year. This extension shall be permitted upto 31.12.2005 on payment of extension fee/compromise fee @ 2.5% of the present prevailing allotment price in case of residential plots and actual price in case of c
