Back
NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
Ajit Bharihoke, Presiding Member, Mrs. Rekha Gupta, Member
Charanjit Singh Bakhshi —Petitioner
versus
Punjab Urban Development Authority & Ors. —Respondents
Revision Petition No.2077 of 2009
(Against the Order dated 16/02/2009 in Appeal No. 158/2006 of the State Commission Chandigarh)
Decided on 15.1.2016
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner: In person
For the Respondents:Mr. Ranjit Sharma, Advocate
IMPORTANT POINT
Alternative plot can be allotted on same price on which original plot was agreed to be allotted.
Headnote:Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Sections 15, 17, 19 and 21—Real estate—Allotment of plot—Denial of possession of plot—Complaint dismissed by State Commission in appeal— Petitioner is a subsequent allottee who purchased right of original allottee—Respondent authority in view of its inability to deliver earlier allotted plot to petitioner and delay caused for justifiable reasons allotted alternative plot to petitioner which was accepted by him—Alternative plot was allotted on same price on which original plot was agreed to be allotted—No fault in impugned orders passed by State Commission which may call for interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction—Revision Petitions dismissed. (Paras 17 and 18)
Result: Revision Petitions dismissed.
Ajit Bharihoke, Presiding Member—By this order, we propose to dispose of the above noted revision petitions arising out of the order of the State Commission Punjab dated 16.02.2009 in First Appeal No. 158 of 2006 & First Appeal No. 275 of 2006.
2. Briefly stated facts relevant for the disposal of the revision petitions are that pursuant to a development scheme floated by respondents opposite parties, one Smt. Mann Kaur Sabharwal was allotted plot no.3077, Sector 69, Mohali measuring 500 sq. yards vide allotment letter dated 07.10.1996. Smt. Mann Kaur in terms of the allotment letter deposited a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- towards 25% of total consideration amount of Rs.9,00,000/-. The balance Rs.6,75,000/- alongwith interest @ 10% was payable by her in six yearly instalments. The petitioner Charanjit Singh Bakshi purchased said plot from Mann Kaur in year 1997 and applied to the respondents for transfer of said plot in his name. The request for transfer was accepted by the respondents and the petitioner complainant was issued re-allotment letter in his favour vide letter dated 16.03.1998. Despite of re-allotment, the respondents failed to deliver possession of the allotted plot to the petitioner complainant. The complainant, however, was informed vide letter dated 12.07.1999 issued by respondent no.2 that delivery of said plot was not feasible and an option was invited from the complainant for an alternative plot. Pursuant to the said option, the complainant was allotted alternative plot no.3150, Sector 69, Mohali.
3. It is the case of the petitioner complainant that plot no. 3150, Sector 69, Mohali was low lying and unfit for construction of house. The complainant, therefore, made an application dated 04.07.2000 to the opposite parties requesting for allotment of some alternative plot. The father of the complainant personally met the Chief Administrator of the opposite party and gave application dated 09.10.2000 for allotment of alternative plot. The aforesaid application was followed by another application dated 06.12.2000. The Chief Engineer of the opposite parties visited the spot and vide his letter dated 27.12.2000 confirmed that alternative plot was located in a pond more than 8 ft. deep. Despite that, no action was taken on the request of the complainant for alternative plot.
4. When the efforts of the complainant for getting an alternative plot failed, a legal notice dated 01.04.2002 was issued to the opposite parties. After a very long time, complainant came to know that opposite parties have allotted him plot no.1167, Sector 69, Mohali in lieu of plot no.3150, Sector 69, Mohali. The father of the complainant thus met the Estate Officer of the opposite parties in May 2003 and requested for issue of allotment letter. The allotment letter, however, was issued on 09.06.2003 after repeated visits of the father of the complainant to the office of the opposite parties.
5. It is further the case of the complainant that ultimately the opposite parties vide letter dated 22.01.2004 called upon the complainant to take delivery of possession of plot no. 1167, Sector 69, Mohali on any working day, pursuant to which possession of plot was taken by the complainant on 12.02.2004. According to the complainant, the opposite parties by delaying the possession of the plot to the complainant has committed deficiency in service. Thus, the complainant raised a consumer dispute by approaching the concerned District Forum praying for compensation to the tune of Rs.19,00,000/-.
6. The opposite parties in their written statement admitted that plot no. 3077, Sector 69 was initially allotted to Mann Kaur Sabharwal, which allotment was subsequently transferred in the name of the petitioner complainant after he purchased the plot from Mann Kaur Sabharwal. It was admitted that total price of the plot was Rs.9,00,000/- against which a sum of Rs.2,25,000/- was deposited by Mann Kaur and balance was to be paid in six yearly instalments alongwith interest @ 1
