Punjab

Sangrur

CC/99/2021

Arvinder Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

Chairman, Improvement Trust - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Sumir Fatta

06 Jun 2024

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SANGRUR .

                                                                         Complaint No. 99

 Instituted on:   25.01.2021

                                                                         Decided on:     06 .06.2024

 

Arvinder Kaur aged about 52 years wife of Shri Raj Kumar Kapoor, resident of K-67, Majithia Enclave, Lane No.4, Patiala.

                                                         …. Complainant.     

                                                 Versus

1.             Chairman, Improvement Trust, Sunam Road, Sangrur.

2.             Executive Officer, Improvement Trust, Sangrur.

                                                        ..Opposite parties.

 

For the complainant  :       Shri Rishav Sardana, Adv.

For Opp.parties          :      Shri Pawan Gupta,Adv.

Quorum                                          

Jot Naranjan Singh Gill, President

Sarita Garg, Member

                        Kanwaljeet Singh, Member

 

ORDER

SARITA GARG, MEMBER

1.             Complainant has preferred the present complaint against the opposite parties  on the ground that OPs advertised for allotment of residential plots in the area of Capt. Karam Singh Nagar, Sangrur and the complainant was allotted accordingly plot bearing number 221 of 200 Sq. yards (corner) vide letter/memo number 573 dated 12.6.2018.  Further case of complainant is that as per the allotment letter, the total cost of the plot was Rs.3,20,000/- and apart from that, a sum of Rs.14080/- was to be paid as cess and Rs.32,000/- being extra 10% of the sale consideration on account of corner plot.  Further case of complainant is that after obtaining schedule of mode of payment, the complainant made the entire amount of Rs.3,21,630/-. Further case of complainant is that as per terms and conditions of the plot the complainant was to complete the construction within three year over the plot from the date of taking possession of plot, but due to unavoidable circumstances, the complainant could not raise construction on the plot.  Further case of complainant is that in the year 2016 the Local Government formulated a scheme and as per that scheme, relief was given to the allottees, who did not raise construction within stipulated period of allotment letter, he/she after depositing 50% of the non-construction charges alongwith submission of map before 31.10.2016 can get the site plan approved.  Further case of complainant is that the complainant availed the opportunity of the said scheme and deposited Rs.1,00,770/- with the OPs i.e. 50% of non construction charges as per the scheme. The complainant also submitted the site plan of the proposed construction with the OPs alongwith Rs.2668/- as fee for sanctioning of the site plan. The grievance of the complainant is that despite visiting the OPs so many times, the OPs did not sanction the site plan. Further case of complainant is that the complainant received a letter bearing number P/IT/63A dated 28.10.2016 through registered post and it was also having a map which was bearing the signatures and stamp of Assistant Trust Engineer and Draftsman of Improvement Trust, Sangrur, but the same was not signed by the sanctioning authority i.e. Executive Officer. It is further averred that the site plan sent by the OPs was having so many discrepancies like the map was sent to the complainant on 17.08.2018 after a period of about two years, the plot which was allotted to the complainant was situated at Karam Singh Nagar Scheme at Sangrur while the site plan sent by the OPs is having the address of Karam Singh Nagar Scheme, Barnala and the plot number was also changed. It is stated further that the map/site plan sent by the OPs was never submitted by the complainant. Further case of complainant is that the complainant received another letter bearing number 995 dated 05.10.2020 from the OPs wherein she was told that her site plan was sanctioned by the Trust which she had received on 17.08.2018 and meanwhile she was further directed to non construction charges.  Further case of complainant is that she approached the OPs so many times for sanctioning of the site plan, but the same was not sanctioned rather the OPs started asking the complainant to deposit the non-construction charges.  Thus, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the OPs, the complainant has prayed that the OPs be directed to issue the sanctioned site plan/map of the complainant and further to grant a period of four years time in future from sanctioning of the site plan without charging any non construction fee, not to charge any non construction fee from the complainant from 28.10.2016, not to resume the plot of the complainant and further to pay compensation and litigation expenses.

2.             In reply filed by OPs, the averments in the complaint have been denied in toto.  It is admitted that the plot in question was allotted to the complainant and deposit of non-construction fee of Rs.1,00,770/-  as well as submission of map is admitted. It is stated further that the complainant never visited the OPs for about two years after deposit of the above said fee with the respondents nor any request letter was ever sent. It is further stated that the husband of the complainant is rendering his service as Executive Officer in the Improvement Trust itself and he is well conversant with the rules and regulations of the Trust and despite that they disobeyed the same.   As far as sanctioning of the site plan is concerned, it can also be passed by the Assistant Trust Engineer in the absence of Executive officer and majority of the work in regard to passing of site plan is done by the Drawing branch and the technical branch.  It is further averred that since husband of the complainant is posted as Executive Officer at Improvement Trust, he with malafide intention and just to save the complainant from the two years due non construction fee has not collected the site plan from the OPs.   Further it is averred that the complainant sent letter number 163 date 2.2.2021 vide which the OPs waived of the NCF of the complainant upto 17.08.2018 with the condition that the complainant shall raise the construction of the plot by depositing the NCF of the remaining period.  It is further mentioned that as per rules and regulations of Local Govt. as and when a site plan/map is submitted by the owner of the plot and there is no objection raised by local authority within thirty days and no application/communication regarding map sanctioning is receiving by the local authority by the owner in 15 days from date of submission of the map.   It is stated that there is no deficiency in service on the part of the OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

3.             The complainant also filed rejoinder to the written reply of the complaint and averments of the complaint were reiterated.

4.             The learned counsel for the complainant has produced Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-32 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has produced Ex.OPs/1 to Ex.OPs/4 copies of documents and affidavit and closed evidence.

5.             We have gone through the pleadings put in by  the parties along with their supporting documents with their valuable assistance. 

6.             It is an admitted fact between the parties that complainant was allotted plot bearing number 221 of 200 Sq. yards (corner) vide letter/memo number 573 dated 12.6.2008 in Karam Singh Nagar, Scheme, as is evident from the copy of allotment of plot letter dated 12.06.2008.   Further  case of complainant is that as per the allotment letter, the total cost of the plot was Rs.3,20,000/- and apart from that, a sum of Rs.14,080/- was to be paid as cess and Rs.32,000/- being extra 10% of the sale consideration on account of corner plot.  Further case of complainant is that after obtaining schedule of mode of payment, the complainant made the entire amount of Rs.3,21,630/- to the OPs as is evident from the receipt, which is on record as Ex.C-3. Further case of complainant is that as per terms and conditions of the plot the complainant was to complete the construction within three year over the plot from the date of taking possession of plot, but due to unavoidable circumstances, the complainant could not raise construction on the plot.  Further case of complainant is that in the year 2016 the Local Government formulated a scheme and as per that scheme, relief was given to the allottees vide letter dated 20.09.2016, a copy of which on record is Ex.C-4, vide which it was formulated that the person who did not raise construction within stipulated period of allotment letter, he/she after depositing 50% of the non-construction charges alongwith submission of site plan before 31.10.2016 can get the site plan approved.  It is also not in dispute that the complainant availed the opportunity of the said scheme and deposited Rs.1,00,770/- with the OPs i.e. 50% of non construction charges as per the scheme as is evident from the copy of receipt Ex.C-6. The complainant also submitted the site plan of the proposed construction with the OPs alongwith Rs.2668/- as fee for sanctioning of the site plan as is evident from the copy of receipt dated 28.10.2016 Ex.C-5. Ex.C-8 is the copy of site plan. Ex.C-9 is the copy of letter number P/IT/63-A dated 28.10.2016 vide which the site plan was sent to the complainant. Ex.C-10 to Ex.C-25 are the copies of various letters sent to the OPs for sanctioning the site plan in question.  Ex.C-27 is the copy of letter sent by the OPs on 05.10.2020 wherein it has been mentioned that the complainant admitted that he received the approved site plan from the OPs on 17.08.2018. The complainant has also produced the estimate issued by Gupta Architects dated 03.06.2023, Ex.C-31, wherein it has been stated that tentative cost of construction during the period from 01.11.2016 to 07.05.2017 was Rs.4,12,000/-, whereas in the year 2023 it has gone up to Rs.9,02,700/- meaning thereby there is high rise in the construction rates and this report is duly corroborated by the affidavit of Er. Naresh Kumar Gupta, Civil Engineer Ex.C-32.  All this evidence is duly corroborated by the affidavit of the complainant Ex.C-1. Thus, the learned counsel for complainant has further contended vehemently that the OPs have intentionally and wilfully withheld the site plan and never approved/passed the same as is evident from the evidence produced on record. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has contended that despite visiting the OPs so many times, the OPs did not sanction the site plan. Even otherwise, the complainant received a letter bearing number P/IT/63A dated 28.10.2016 through registered post and it was also having a map which was bearing the signatures and stamp of Assistant Trust Engineer and Draftsman of Improvement Trust, Sangrur, but the same was not signed by the sanctioning authority i.e. Executive Officer of the Improvement Trust. It is further on record that the site plan sent by the OPs was having so many discrepancies like the map was sent to the complainant on 17.08.2018 after a period of about two years, the plot which was allotted to the complainant was situated at Karam Singh Nagar Scheme at Sangrur while the site plan sent by the OPs is having the address of Karam Singh Nagar Scheme, Barnala and the plot number was also changed/rectified. Accordingly, the complainant has prayed for acceptance of the complaint with special costs.

7.             On the other hand, the learned counsel for the OPs has contended vehemently that the plot in question was allotted to the complainant and deposit of non-construction fee of Rs.1,00,770/-  as well as submission of map is also admitted. It is further contended that the complainant never visited the OPs for about two years after deposit of the above said fee with the respondents nor any request letter was ever sent to the OPs for passing of the site plan of the plot in question. It is further contended that the husband of the complainant is rendering his service as Executive Officer in the Improvement Trust itself and he is well conversant with the rules and regulations of the Trust and despite that they disobeyed the same.   As far as sanctioning of the site plan is concerned, it can also be passed by the Assistant Trust Engineer in the absence of Executive officer and majority of the work in regard to passing of site plan is done by the Drawing branch and the technical branch.    Further it is contended by the learned counsel for the OPs that the complainant sent letter number 163 date 2.2.2021 vide which the OPs waived of the NCF of the complainant upto 17.08.2018 with the condition that the complainant shall raise the construction of the plot by depositing the NCF of the remaining period.  It is further contended that as per rules and regulations of Local Govt. as and when a site plan/map is submitted by the owner of the plot and if there is no objection raised by local authority within thirty days and no application/communication regarding map/site plan sanctioning is received from the local authority by the owner in 15 days from date of submission of the map, then it would be presumed that the site plan has been sanctioned. Lastly the OPs have prayed for dismissal of the complaint with special costs.

8.             After hearing the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties we find that the plot in question bearing number 221 was allotted to the complainant in Karam Singh Nagar Scheme, Sangrur vide letter dated 12.06.2008 Ex.C-2. The complainant though submitted the site plan for approval to raise construction on the plot in question on 28.10.2016 after depositing of the requisite non construction fee of Rs.1,00,770/- vide receipt Ex.C-6 and further submitted the site plan for approval to the OPs by depositing the requisite fee of Rs.2668/- vide receipt Ex.C-5. Ex.C-8 is the copy of site plan approved by the OPs.  A bare perusal of the site plan clearly reveals that it relates to another plot i.e. Captain Karam Singh Nagar, Barnala and not of Karam Singh Nagar, Sangrur.  We may mention that even it bears the signatures of three different persons and even a single person not noticed about the site plan whether it relates to Barnala or Sangrur.  It is further worth mentioning here that the complainant though approached the OPs so many times by writing different letters, copies of which are on record as Ex.C-11 to Ex.C-25 which clearly reveals that the complainant requested the OPs so many times for passing the correct site plan on plot number 221 in Karam Singh Nagar Scheme, Sangrur, so that she could raise the construction on the plot in question.  On the other hand, OPs have not produced iota of evidence to establish that the site plan/map was ever passed by the OPs or ever intimated to the complainant about the passing of the site plan relating to plot number 221 situated at Karam Singh Nagar Scheme, Sangrur. In the circumstances, we find that OPs have miserably failed to establish on record the reason why the OPs did not approve/pass the site plan of the plot of the complainant.  It is worth mentioning here that even during the present proceedings the OPs did not choose to approve/sanction the site plan of the plot number 221 of the complainant situated at Captain Karam Singh Nagar, Sangrur. Accordingly, we find it to be a clear cut case of deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.

 9.            In view of our above discussion, we allow the complaint and direct the OPs to approve/sanction the site plan of plot number 221 of the complainant as applied for by the complainant on 28.10.2016 and send the same to the complainant by registered post on his address. However, it is made clear that the OPs shall not charge any non construction fee  from the complainant for approving/sanctioning the site plan of the plot in question. We further direct that the OPs shall provide three years period to the complainant for raising the construction on the plot in question after sanctioning of the site plan without charging any non construction fee. We further direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- on account of escalation of cost of construction and an amount of Rs.75,000/- as compensation for mental tension, agony and harassment.  We also direct the OPs to pay to the complainant an amount of Rs.22,000/- as cost of litigation expenses. This order be complied with within a period of sixty days of receipt of copy of this order.

10.           It is further made clear that the state exchequer cannot be burdened with these heavy costs of compensation and cost of escalation of construction cost, as such, it is open for the Improvement Trust Sangrur to recover this amount from the concerned Executive Officers/officials posted at that time responsible for this mistake/negligence under intimation to this office. 

11.           The complaint could not be decided within the statutory time period due to heavy pendency of cases.

12.           Copy of this order be supplied to the parties free of cost. File be consigned to the records after its due compliance.      

                            Pronounced.

 

                            June 6, 2024.