STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Date of institution : 31.08.2023 Reserved on : 05.12.2025 Date of Decision : 09.01.2026

1. Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, through its Chairman

2. Chairman, Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana …Appellants/Opposite Parties Versus Lueena Puri W/o Sh. Anil Puri, R/o 307-A, Rajeev Enclave, Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar, Ludhiana …Respondent/Complainant First Appeal under Section 41 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the order dated 02.02.2023 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana in C.C. No. 236 of 2019.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary, President Ms. Simarjot Kaur, Member Mr. Vishav Kant Garg, 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 appellants : Ms. Kavita Arora, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. Hitesh Sood, Advocate VISHAV KANT GARG, MEMBER :

Appellants/Opposite Parties i.e. Ludhiana Improvement Trust, have filed the present Appeal through its Chairman to challenge the impugned order dated 17.05.2019 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Ludhiana (in short, “the District Commission”), whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent/Complainant-Lueena Puri had been partly allowed.

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

3. Briefly, the facts of the case as made out by the Respondent/ Complainant in the Complaint filed before the District Commission are that the OPs on the basis of draw of lots had allotted one Plot No.1066-G, measuring 125 sq. yards in Shahid Bhagat Singh Nagar to Mehar Singh s/o Bachittar Singh. Allotment Letter No. LIT/SB/11786 dated 04.11.1999 was issued in his name. Total amount of Rs.1,81,875/- was paid by the allottee and the OP-Trust had executed Agreement of Sale with the allottee on 16.02.2004. Thereafter, said plot was transferred in the name of Satwinder Singh s/o Kirpal Singh on resale and Sale Deed in this regard was executed on 11.11.2005. Said Satwinder Singh had further sold the plot to the Complainant on 06.06.2011. The Complainant had averred that as there was huge encroachment in the street closed to her plot and the area was blocked, therefore, she was unable to raise the construction and was forced to live in a rented accommodation. The Trust had constructed the road up to Plot No. 1068-C and not upto the plot of the Complainant. The Complainant had approached the OPs on number of times and requested them to remove the encroachment but of no use. Inspite of removing the encroachment, the OP-Trust vide letter No.LIT/SB/81316 dated 02.05.2018 had raised illegal demand of Rs.3,84,375/- on account of non-construction fee relating to the period w.e.f. 2006 till 2018 and Rs.24,912/- on account of enhancement in the price of the plot. Total amount of Rs.4,09,287/- was asked to be deposited by the Complainant. On this, the Complainant had approached the OPs and informed them that the said demand was illegal and arbitrary, against the terms and conditions of the Allotment Letter/Sale Agreement & Sale Deed. She had prayed to withdraw the same as no such condition of demanding non-construction charges had been mentioned in the allotment letter. Since the Rules were amended later i.e. after the actual date of allotment of the plot, therefore, the same were not applicable with retrospective effect in the case of the Complainant.

4. Stating the act of the opposite parties to be a case of ‘deficiency in service’ and ‘unfair trade practice’, it was prayed in the Complaint that the OPs be directed to withdraw the demand of Rs.3,84,275/- and Rs.24,912/- as non-construction fee and enhancement amount, respectively. Further the OPs be directed to remove the encroachment near the plot of the Complainant and to