STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 06.03.2024 Date of decision : 22.03.2024 Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Feroze Gandhi Market, Ludhiana, through its Chairman/E.O.

….Appellant/OP Versus Jaswinder Pal Singh (aged 71 plus years [super Senior Citizen]) S/o Satnam Singh, R/o H.No.1784, Street No.34-A, Janta Nagar, Ludhiana, General Power of Attorney of Sh. Om Parkash.

….Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the orders dated 12.07.2022 and 24.01.2024 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member

1) Whether Reporters of the Newspapers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes/No

2) To be referred to the Reporters or not? Yes/No

3) Whether judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes/No Present:-

For the Appellant : Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate.

JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY, PRESIDENT Appellant/OP i.e. Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana through its Chairman/E.O. being aggrieved by the order dated 12.07.2022 whereby the defence of the OP had been struck off and also the order dated 24.01.2024 whereby the Review Application filed by the OP had been dismissed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana (in short, “the District Commission”) has filed the present Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter to be referred as the ‘Act’).

2. It would be apposite to mention here that hereinafter the parties will be referred, as had been arrayed before the District Commission.

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Respondent/Complainant in the Complaint filed by him before the District Commission and which are necessary for disposal of the present Appeal are that one Sh. Om Parkash was allotted a plot No.422-D measuring 125 sq.yds. in ‘Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar Society’, Ludhiana vide Allotment Letter dated 19.03.2015. As per the terms and conditions of the Allotment Letter, the amount of the plot was to be paid in instalments w.e.f. 18.10.2015 up to 18.10.2017. However, vide Resolution dated 09.09.2019, the fresh schedule of instalments was issued to the allottees and accordingly the Complainant was informed. Said plot was given to the Complainant through General Power of Attorney dated 15.05.2018 by the original allottee Sh. Om Parkash. The Complaint was filed by the Complainant being the Power of Attorney of Sh. Om Parkash seeking interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the amount so deposited by him.

Thereafter, the Complainant had filed an Application for amendment of the Complaint. Reply of said Application was also filed. The Application filed by the Complainant was allowed vide order dated 06.05.2022 and the OP was granted time to file reply to the amended Complaint till 07.06.2022. However, the counsel for the Appellant-Trust did not appear on the dates fixed i.e. 07.06.2022 as well as on 12.07.2022 and as such the defence of the OP was struck off vide order dated 12.07.2022. Thereafter, the Appellant/OP had filed the Review Application, which was dismissed vide order dated 24.01.2024 on the ground that the same was not maintainable.

4. Both the orders dated 12.07.2022 and 24.01.2024 passed by the District Commission have been challenged by the Appellant/OP by way of filing the present Appeal by raising a number of grounds.

5. Ms. Kavita Arora, learned counsel for the Appellant/OP has submitted that the earlier counsel namely Sh. R.K. Sharma had not informed the Appellant-Trust regarding the status of the case and due to his negligence, the written statement on behalf of the OP could not be filed. Learned counsel has further submitted that subsequently an Application for review of the order dated 12.07.2022 (wrongly typed as 06.11.2022) as well as for filing written statement on behalf of the OP was filed but the said Application was dismissed vie order dated 24.01.2024