LAWS(SC)-2009-4-117

LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST Vs. SHAKTI CO OPERATIVE HOUSE

Decided On April 13, 2009
LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST Appellant
V/S
SHAKTI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by special leave is directed against the order dated 22nd March, 2001 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commis sion, New Delhi, hereinafter referred to as "the Commission" whereby the Revision Petition No. 705 of 1999 filed by the appellants against the decision of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (for short "the State Commis sion") directing delivery of possession of a plot of land to the respondent has been dismissed.

(2.) Material facts, giving rise to the appeal are as under :

(3.) In the year 1970, the appellant-Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, here inafter referred to as "the Trust", formulated a scheme, styled as Model Town Ex tension Scheme Part II. For the said purpose, proceedings for acquisition of land in certain villages were initiated. Lands owned by several co-operative housing societ ies were also notified as part of the land proposed to be acquired. However, before the announcement of awards in respect of the lands to be acquired, representations were made by several societies to the Trust as also to the Government seeking ex emption of their land from acquisition. The Trust acceded to the request by some of the societies and recommended to the Government that the land of these societies be exempted from acquisition, which was accepted by the Government. The respon dent Society was also amongst those societies who were granted exemption. Not withstanding making of the awards, the Trust neither took possession of the land belonging to the respondent nor paid any compensation. Subsequently in the year 1981-82, the Government also issued a notification under Section 56 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 for abandonment of proposal for acquisition of lands belonging to these societies, the respondent Society being one of them. The exemption was on certain terms and conditions with which we are not directly concerned in this appeal.