LAWS(NCD)-2000-7-64

MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SANTOSH KUMAR GARG

Decided On July 03, 2000
MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant
V/S
SANTOSH KUMAR GARG Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against the judgment and order passed on 26.8.1997 by District Consumer Forum, Meerut, in Complaint Case No.1013 of 1994.

(2.) The facts of the case, stated in brief, are as under : the complainant during the Trade Fair organised at Delhi in November, 1990 booked one plot measuring 150 sq. mtrs. in Ganga Nagar Phase-II Scheme after depositing a sum of Rs.7,500/-. On 8.1.1991 the complainant received a letter from the appellant with indication of plot to be allotted in February, 1991 and an amount of Rs.15,000/- was damanded as allotment money which was deposited by the complainant within the stipulated period. Thereafter on 28.1.1991 a letter was sent to the complainant informing him that Plot No.272 measuring 150 sq. mtrs. has been allotted to him. The complainant went to the site and found that plot has not been demarcated and hence he approached Meerut Development Authority. He came to know that possession of the plot will be given at the earliest after making development. On this assurance from the appellant Meerut Development Authority, the complainant started depositing the instalments. Vide letter dated 25.2.1992 the complainant was informed that the possession will be handed over to him on completion of the required formalities. When the complainant went to the site, he found that the plotting has not been done and in future also there may not be any possibility of plotting of the area. The complainant has also alleged that he came to know that land acquisition matter is pending in Civil Court and there is no hope of getting the plot. Therefore, the complainant has filed this complaint for refund of Rs.50,000/- alongwith interest @ 24% per annum.

(3.) The appellant in its written version has alleged that the complainant has not completed the formalities hence possession could not be given to him. The appellant has placed an argument that there is no dispute about the land and the plot has been demarcated with provision of full development.