STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

PUNJAB, CHANDIGARH.

Consumer Complaint No.617 of 2018

Date of institution : 25.07.2018

Date of decision : 30.07.2018

Subhash Kumar son of Sh. Jai Dev, resident of House No.7-A,

J.P. Nagar, Sangrur.

….Complainant

Versus

1. Executive Officer, Improvement Trust, Sangrur.

2. Chairman, Improvement Trust, Sangrur.

E-mail id: itsangrur@yahoomail.com

.…Opposite Parties

Consumer

Complaint

under

Section

17

of

the

Consumer

Protection Act, 1986.

Quorum:-

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Paramjeet Singh Dhaliwal, President

Present:-

For the complainant : Sh. Ravinder Sharma, Advocate

JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH DHALIWAL, PRESIDENT

The instant complaint has been filed by the complainant,

under Section 17 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (in short,

“the Act”), against the opposite parties(in short “OPs”) seeking

following directions to them:-

C.C. No.617 of 2018 2

i)

to refund the amount deposited by the complainant

along with interest @ 15% per month from the date of

deposit till the final decision of the present complaint.

ii)

to pay Rs.5,00,000/-, as compensation on account of

suffering hardship mental agony, harassment and emotional

disturbance;

iii)

to pay Rs.1,00,000/-, towards litigation expenses.

2. The facts in brief, as set out in the complaint, are that the

OPs invited applications for allotment of plots in J.P. Nagar in open

auction, which was held on 17.11.2016. The complainant

participated in the auction and had given highest bid for plot

No.1A, measuring 200 sq. yards @ Rs.30,000/- per sq. yard. The

reserve price of plot was Rs.15,500/- per sq. yard. The

complainant deposited Rs.50,000/- as earnest money on

15.11.2016. Thereafter, he deposited another amount of

Rs.10,06,750/- (Rs.6,60,000/- as 10% of the total price + Rs.750/-

miscellaneous expenses +Rs.3,96,000/- cess fee @ 6%) on

18.11.2016 after excluding the sum of Rs.50,000/- which was

already deposited. Another amount of Rs.9,90,000/- (i.e. 15% fee)

on 15.12.2016. He received allotment letter dated 07.03.2017

wherein the area of the plot was mentioned as 220.97 Sq. yards

instead of 200 Sq. yards for which he gave the bid. By the same

letter a sum of Rs.1,73,003/- was demanded as balance price i.e.

¼ price of the plot and cess fee within 30 days. On receiving the

C.C. No.617 of 2018 3

said letter the complainant raised objection to the said demand of

the OPs. Having received no reply, he got served a legal notice

dated 21.03.2017 followed by reminder legal notice dated

17.04.2017. The OPs sent reply dated 05.05.2017 that the area

shall remain vacant between plot No.1-A and 2-A and the

complainant shall not cover the same. It is further averred that the

complainant remained admitted in the hospital being critically ill

and could not send the reply to the letters of the OPs and this fact

was brought to the notice of OPs through his wife. Thereafter, the

complainant came to know that the OPs are demanding more

money for 20.97 Sq. yards and that the plot in question is neither

rectangular nor square in measurements but has different sizes of

all the sides (Begunia). The OPs had never disclosed this very fact

at the time of auction nor it was mentioned in the advertisement.

As such, they kept the complainant in dark, which amounts to

deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the

OPs. Hence, this complaint seeking above reliefs.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the complainant at length

and have also carefully gone through the record of the complaint

at the admission stage thereof.

4. Learned counsel for the complainant contends that the

complainant has to