New Complaint No.225 of 2023.

                                                              Date of Institution:26.10.2023.

                                                            Old Complaint No:257 of 2018.

                                                             Date of Institution: 07.06.2018.

                                                                      Date of order:04.01.2024.

Shiv Kumari W/o Shiv Shankar Sharma, resident of 19/297, Adarsh Nagar, Mandi Gurdaspur Tehsil and District Gurdaspur. Pin Code – 143521.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               .....Complainant.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          

                                                                                              VERSUS

The Estate Officer, Punjab Urban Development Authority PUDA Bhawan Green Avenue, Amritsar. Pin Code – 143001.

                                                                                                                                                                              ….Opposite party.

                                                              Complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh.Rajneesh Kaushal, Advocate.

              For the Opposite Party: Sh.Vikas Sharma, Advocate.     

Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.

          Shiv Kumari, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 12 of Consumer Protection Act (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against The Estate Officer, PUDA (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite party).

2.       Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is the owner of a Plot No. 317 Measuring 239.20 Square Yards situated at Urban Estate, Batala Road, Gurdaspur which she had purchased from the opposite party vide Allotment Letter/ Memo No. E.O.-PUDA-ASR-2011/5716 dated 10.08.2011. Hence she is consumer of the opposite party. It is pleaded that when the complainant intended to construct her house but she could not do so because there was neither water supply nor any arrangement of water which is very essential for the construction of house, nor there was any electricity arrangement. The opposite party had agreed to build a bridge for passage over the big drain, to build a shopping complex, to build gates for the security purpose of the colony, to build a school, to provide clean playgrounds and parks, to provide a KV station for electricity and to build a boundary wall around the whole colony, but the opposite party has failed to provide these facilities which the opposite party had agreed to provide before the allotment of the plots to the purchasers. It is further pleaded that the said colony is not according to the terms and conditions of PUDA. It is further pleaded that the complainant has requested the opposite party not to impose any penalty for non-construction fee of her house in the Urban Estate, Batala Road Gurdaspur. It is further pleaded that complainant alongwith other allottees of the colony, raised a demand to the opposite party through newspaper dated 15.04.2018 of daily Punjabi Ajit and dated 16.05.2018 of daily Punjabi Jag Bani to provide the above said facilities in the colony but no action has been taken by the opposite party till date. It is further pleaded that the opposite party issued an illegal and unlawful notice vide No. ADA/PUDA/A.A./ASR/2018/2505 dated 05.02.2018 to the complainant in which the opposite party has raised a demand of Rs.52,185/- as Non-construction fee from the complainant. The complainant is not bound to pay the said demand of Rs.52,185/- as Non-construction fee to the opposite party as the opposite party have not provided the facilities of Water, sewerage and electricity supply, a bridge for passage over the big drain, a shopping complex, gates for the security purpose of the colony, a school, clean playgrounds and parks, and a KV station for electricity and boundary wall around the whole colony which the opposite party had agreed to provide before the allotment of the plots to the purchasers at the PUDA Urban Estate Batala Road, Gurdaspur. It is further pleaded that by not providing the above said facilities there is a clear cut deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party. It is further pleaded that the complainant is not entitled to pay the amount of Rs.52,185/- as Non-construction fee to the opposite party. It is further pleaded that according to the rules & regulations of the Punjab Urban Development Authority, the above said facilities should be provided to the allottees before the allotment of the plots to the allottees but the opposite party has failed to provide these facilities to the allottees including the complainant. It is further pleaded that the opposite party has violated the rules & regulations and provisions of the PUDA. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite party the complainant has suffered great loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. It is further pleaded that there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

          On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite party and prayed that the notice bearing No.ADA/PUDA/A.A./ASR/2018/2505 dated 05.02.2018 amounting to Rs.52,185/- issued by the opposite party to the complainant is illegal and unlawful, null and void and is not binding upon the complainant and also opposite party be not to impose any further penalty and to pay Rs.20,000/- as compensation for harassment and mental agony and Rs.10,000/- as litigation expenses alongwith interest @ 18% per annum to the complainant and also issued the directions to the opposite party to provide the above said facilities to the complainant at Urban Estate Batala Road, Gurdaspur in the interest of justice.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite party appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filing their written reply by taking the preliminary objections that the present complaint is misconceived and not maintainable and liable to be dismissed. It is pleaded that the complainant has purchased the plot No.317 with permission and allotment the same vide Memo No.E.O.-PUDA/ASR-2011/5716 dated 10.08.2011. The complainant submitted an undertaking qua the plot in question and admitted the terms and conditions of original allotment i.e. 10.08.2011 and also further to abide the terms and conditions of allotment letter as alleged. It is further pleaded that the Non-construction of his house is only due to the fault of the complainant and not at the instance of opposite party rather, it is violation of the Apartment and Property Regulations Act, 1995 and its rules. The facilities of water supply of drinking water moreover fresh water can't be used for construction as per law and electricity has already been provided by the opposite party. It is for the complainant to construct the plot in question within 3 years from the original allotment dated 10.08.2011. It is further pleaded that the facilities have already been provided i.e. water supply and electricity as alleged. In fact the alleged facilities have already been provided before the allotment. The complainant has not complied with the terms and conditions of construction, thus due to his own fault the complainant could not construct his house and liable to pay the Non-construction fee and penalty. It is further pleaded that water supply and electricity supply and other required amenities have already been provided not only to the complainant but also to other allottees.

          On merits, the opposite party has reiterated their stand as taken in legal objections and denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

4.       Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Shiv Kumari, (Complainant) as Ex.C-1 alongwith other documents as Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-14.

5.       Learned counsel for the opposite party has filed documents as Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-8 alongwith reply.

6.       Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

7.       Written arguments not filed by both the parties. 

8.       Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant is owner of plot No.317 at Urban Estate, Batala Road, Gurdaspur which was purchased from the opposite party vide letter of allotment dated 10.08.2011. It is further argued that the complainant intended to raise construction of her house but she could not do so as there was no water supply which was necessary for construction of house nor there was electricity arrangement. Even the opposite party failed to construct a bridge for passing over the big drain and further failed to built a shopping complex, to install gates for security purpose, to construct school, to provide clean playgrounds and parks, to provide KV station for electricity and boundary wall. It is further argued that complainant had requested the opposite party refrain from claiming any penalty for non construction of her house as the allottees has not been provided with basis amenities of life. However, inspite of repeated requests by the complainant opposite party raised demand of Rs.52,185/- on account of non construction fee without providing amenities which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

9.       On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties has argued that complainant is bound by the undertaking and terms and conditions Ex.C2 and all the facilities have already been provided by the opposite party. It is further argued that facility of water supply of drinking cannot be used for construction of house. It is further argued that complainant was required to raise construction of the house within three years form 10.08.2011 but complainant failed to raise construction as such non construction charges were imposed legally and validly as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

10.     We have heard the Ld. counsels for the parties and gone through the record.

11.     To prove her case complainant has placed on record her affidavit Ex.C1, copy of allotment letter Ex.C2, copy of copies of newspaper cutting Ex.C3 and Ex.C4, copy of letter regarding payment of non construction charges Ex.C5, copy of Aadhaar Card Ex.C6, copies of photographs Ex.C7 to Ex.C12, copy of news paper cutting Ex.C13, copy of representation Ex.C14 whereas opposite party has placed on record copy of letter dated 18.01.2011 Ex.OP-5, copy of allotment letter Ex.OP-6, another copy of allotment letter Ex.OP-7, copy of notice regarding payment of non construction charges Ex.OP-8, copy of completion certificate regarding electricity Ex.OP-1, copy of completion certificate regarding civil work Ex.OP-2, copy of completion certificate regarding horticulture work Ex.OP-3 and copy of completion certificate regarding civil work Ex.OP-4. 

12.     It is admitted fact that complainant is owner of plot No.317 measuring 239.20 Square Yards situated at Urban Estate, Batala Road, Gurdaspur and the said plot has been purchased by the complainant from the opposite party vide allotment letter Ex.C2. It is further admitted fact that the complainant was required to raise construction within three years from the date of allotment letter. It is further admitted fact that complainant has failed to raise construction within three years. It is further admitted fact that the opposite party has raised demand of Rs.52,185/- from the complainant on account of non construction charges. The only disputed question before this Commission for adjudication is whether the opposite party can impose and recover the non construction charges from the complainant without providing basic amenities to the complainant.

13.     Perusal of file shows that notice for recovery of non construction charges has been issued on 05.02.2018. However, photographs Ex.C7 to Ex.C12 shows that opposite party has failed to provide basic amenities to the complainant. Even vide letter Ex.C14 dated 05.01.2020 the residents of the colony had requested the opposite parties to provide amenities as agreed meaning thereby that the opposite party failed to provide basis amenities to the complainant upto 05.01.2020 and had issued notice for recovery of non construction fee on 05.02.2018. Even perusal of Ex.OP-2 shows that completion certificate has been issued on 06.08.2018 and although the certificate Ex.OP-1 declares that electricity work was completed on 22.08.2012 but the said certificate issued on 07.08.2018 and there is no record on file that electricity work was completed on 22.08.2012. Similar, is situation with certificates Ex.OP-3 and Ex.OP-4 which shows that opposite party was bent upon to recover non construction charges from the complainant without providing basic amenities. Moreover, opposite party has not placed on record any document as to when the possession was delivered to the complainant after demarcation. The act of opposite party of having imposed non construction charges without providing basic amenities of life amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party.

14.     We have relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi report in 2013(4) CPR 184 in case titled as Jalandhar Improvement Trust Vs Prem Chand another judgment of Hon'ble National Commission reported in 2008(4) CPJ 11 Ludhiana Improvement Trust. Vs. Jagdev Singh another judgment of Hon'ble National Commission in Revision Petition No.889 of 2013 in case titled as Punjab Urban Planning. Vs. Vidya Chetal decided on 14.11.2014 and another judgment of Hon'ble State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab Chandigarh in First Appeal No.889 of 2011 decided on 16.09.2013 wherein it has been held that the opposite party cannot impose non construction charges without providing basic amenities to the allottees.

15.     Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and notice for recovery of non construction charges Ex.C5 dated 05.02.2018 is quashed/set aside. Since the complainant is definitely suffered mental tension, harassment and agony of litigation as such opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- to the complainant within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.                             

16.     The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

17.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.                                                                                                                                                               

            (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

                                                                                      President.  

Announced:                                                   (B.S.Matharu)

Jan. 04, 2024                                                        Member.

*YP*