Punjab

Nawanshahr

CC/36/2019

Agya Kaur - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Nawanshahr Improvement Trust - Opp.Party(s)

Sh MP Nayyar

23 Oct 2019

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES   REDRESSAL FORUM, SHAHEED BHAGAT SINGH NAGAR

 

Consumer Complaint No.   36 of 25.04.2019

              Date of Decision            :  23.10.2019

 

Agya Kaur w/o Kirpal Singh, r/o House No.1004, Phase-1, Urban State Dugri, Ludhiana.

….. Complainant

Versus

1. The Nawanshahr Improvement Trust, Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar through its Executive Officer.
2. The Nawanshahr Improvement Trust, Nawanshahr, District SBS Nagar through its Chairman.

                                      …Opposite parties

 

(Complaint U/s 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986)

 

QUORUM:

SH.KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

SH.KANWALJEET SINGH, MEMBER

COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES:

For complainant            :         Sh.M.P Nayyar, Advocate

For OPs                         :         Sh.A.K.Sareen, Advocate

 

Per KULJIT SINGH, PRESIDENT

 

1. The complainant-Agya Kaur has filed this complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the OPs on the averments that OPs had launched a scheme for residential plots in Rajiv Gandhi Nagar Nawanshahr and invited applications for the same. The allotment of plots was to be made through lottery draw of lots.  After going through the advertisement, she applied for a residential plot measuring 100 sq. yard and deposited a sum of Rs.66,000/- as earnest/advanced money with State Bank of India, vide form no. 429. Through lottery draw of lots on 15.02.2011 application bearing no.3553 a plot bearing no. 22-C measuring 100 sq. yards was allotted to her.  Total price of the plot was to be paid by her as Rs.7,26,000/-  and same was paid as per schedule. After allotment, she was directed to deposit 25% i.e. Rs.1,15,000/- of the total price  of the plot along with 4% cess i.e. Rs.29040/-  and expenses within 30 days from the date of issuance of allotment letter, which was thereby made on 21.07.2011 from          21.07.2011.  She deposited Rs.7,26,000/- as price of the plot, besides it, she deposited 4% cess, interest and expenses to OPs.  The agreement to sell /Form D was executed between the complainant and OPs. She paid total a sum of Rs.8,64,680/- in total including price of the plot, 4% cess and expenses etc. She has visited office of OPs many times and requested to deliver the possession of the said plot. She was informed by OPs that basic amenities are required to be provided, which will be completed soon and possession would be delivered thereby.  When, she visited the spot, it was noticed that there had been no progress in the site and even today the said site of the plot has not been connected with pucca road and there are ditches of more than 15 ft deep. The land is like a chappar and there is no seepage of rain water.  OPs neither handed over any physical possession nor any work/construction is raised in order to provide basic amenities. Therefore, she filed the present complaint and prayed that OPs be directed to refund the total amount of the plot i.e. Rs.8,64,680/- including the price of the plot , 4 % cess and expenses along with interest @ 18% per annum, besides Rs.1 lac as cost of the construction and Rs.1 lac as compensation for mental harassment.
2. Upon notice, OPs appeared and filed written reply and contested the complaint of the complainant by raising preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable.  As per condition of the policy, allottee was required to take the possession within 30 days from the allotment but allottee did not approach to OPs and is deemed that possession of the plot has been taken by the allottee.  As per scheme, OPs complete al the formalities and conditions. On merits, it was averred that all basic amenities  as required to be provided. As per condition of the policy, allottee was required to take possession within 30 days from the allotment but the allottee did not approach to OPs and is deemed that possession of plot has been taken by the allottee. All the street lights, sewerage, pipes and connections  have already been installed. The plots were already attached/connected with pacca road. If there is any ditch in the allotted plot then it is responsibility of the complainant to fill the ditch. Rest of the averments of the complainant were denied by OPs and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. The complainant tendered in evidence her affidavit Ex.CW-1/A along with copies of documents Ex.C-1 to Ex.C-16 and photographs Ex.C-17 to Ex.C-21 and closed the evidence. As against it; OPs relied upon affidavit of Rajesh Kumar Executive Officer as Ex.OP-A  along with copies of documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-22 and closed the evidence.

4.       We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also examined the record of the case very carefully.

5.  

6.       To refute this evidence of the complainant, OPs relied upon affidavit of Rajesh Kumar Executive Officer as Ex.OP-A on the record. This witness stated that as per condition of the policy, allottee was required to take the possession within 30 days from the allotment but allottee did not approach to OPs and is deemed that possession of the plot has been taken by the allottee.  He further stated that all basic amenities  are required to be provided. As per condition of the policy, allottee was required to take possession within 30 days from the allotment but the allottee did not approach to OPs and is deemed that possession of plot has been taken by the allottee. All the street lights, sewerage, pipes and connections  have already been installed. The plots were already attached/connected with pacca road. If there is any ditch in the allotted plot then it is responsibility of the complainant to fill the ditch. He denied any deficiency in service on their part. Similarly, we have also examined other documents Ex.OP-1 to Ex.OP-22 on the record.

7.  

8.       OPs have not produced any such evidence on the record to substantiate its averment of completion of any development work on the spot by it. Consequently, we have come to this conclusion that OP failed to complete the development work at the site within a reasonable period of three years and complainant rightly sought the refund of the deposited amount from OP for  deficiency in service. Hon’ble State Commission Punjab Chandigarh held in First Appeal no. 381 of 2018 decided on 05.09.2018 titled as Punjab Urban Planning & Development Authority PUDA versus Ashok Kumar. The development work was not completed by OP and OP failed to deliver the possession even after issue of allotment letter to allottee within a reasonable period. Similarly, in the case in hand, allotment letter was issued by OP to complainant  on 30.06.2011, vide Ex.C-2,  but possession has not been delivered by OP to her as yet. The only inference is that  OP has not completed  any development work on the spot.  From perusal of photographs clippings Ex.C-17 to Ex.C-21 on the record it is clear that there is no development existed in the allotted area. The land is like a chappar and there is no seepage of rain water.  OPs neither handed over any physical possession nor any work/construction is raised in order to provide basic amenities. This fact is admitted by OPs themselves that as per condition of the policy, allottee was required to take possession within 30 days from the allotment but complainant herself admitted this fact in her affidavit that OPs not delivered any physical possession of the allotted plot till date.

9.       The counsel for the complainant relied upon various judgments in support of his case like:- Gurpreet Singh versus Puma Relators Pvt. Ltd and another by Hon’ble State Commission Punjab Chandigarh reported in 2015(4) CPJ 91 wherein in has been held that development and amenities were incomplete at the time of offering possession. Possession cannot be said to be valid and legal possession. Refund with compensation, litigation cost and compound interest on deposited amount granted. Hon’ble State Commission Punjab further held in case titled as Amar Singh versus Unitech Limited and others reported in 2016(2) CLT 566 that complainant cannot made to wait for an indefinite period for delivery of physical possession of the unit. Complainant is thus entitled to get refund of amount deposited by him.  OPs are also under an obligation to compensate the complainant for inflicting mental agony and causing physical harassment to him.  Pardeep Chowdhry and another versus Unitech Ltd., reported in 2016(4) CLT 236 by Hon’ble National Commission New Delhi that delay in delivery of possession. Offer of possession incomplete flat. Held flat should have been complete in all respects before possession was offered to the complainant. Offering possession of the flat which is not complete in all respects, including the finishing work could not be held to be in conformity with the contractual obligation of the OPs. Hon’ble National Commission New Delhi further held in M/s Utopia Projects Pvt. Ltd vs. Shahin Bl Mulla reported in 2015(2) CPR Page 540 that if possession has not been given on the committed date, the purchaser of the said flat is empowered to seek refund of the amount paid with interest and compensation.

10.     The above referred authorities relied upon by counsel for complainant are applicable in the present case. The development work was not completed by OPs and OPs failed to deliver the possession even after issue of allotment letter to allottee within a reasonable period. There is no provision with regard to refund of the amount. District Forum was justified not to pass the refund order as per order of the Hon’ble State Commission  in First Appeal no. 1162 of 2013 titled as “Suresh Kumar versus Nawanshahr Improvement Trust” decided on 29.09.2014 that no refund order was passed. Therefore, we cannot pass the order for refund the amount to complainant, as per order of Hon’ble State Commission Punjab Chandigarh.

11.     In the light of our above discussion, we accept the complaint of the complainant on account of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice adopted on the part of OPs. Therefore, the OPs are directed to hand over the physical possession of the allotted plot to complainant with all basic amenities within one month from receipt of copy of this order and also directed to pay Rs.10,000/- as compensation for mental harassment.

12. File be indexed and consigned to record room.

Dated:  23.10.2019

 

(Kanwaljeet Singh)                (Kuljit Singh)

                                      Member                                  President