LAWS(NCD)-2002-9-78

BALBIR SINGH Vs. LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST

Decided On September 12, 2002
BALBIR SINGH Appellant
V/S
LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It's an appeal against the order dated 7.7.1999 of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ludhiana (hereinafter called the District Forum ).

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that the appellant-complainant (hereinafter called the complainant) was allotted a plot No.474-D, measuring 100 sq. yards, out of 150 Acre Scheme in Bhai Randhir Singh Nagar, Ludhiana, against his application dated 2.5.1977. Complainant had deposited Rs.400/- as earnest money. Price of the plot was fixed at the rate of Rs.40/- per sq. yard. It was alleged in the complaint that the complainant was told that he would be called when the possession was to be delivered but the possession was never delivered to him. It was then alleged in the complaint that he had made many efforts but the possession was not delivered and the plot allotted to him was never cancelled. He was never at fault. According to the complainant, he was entitled to a direction for the delivery of the possession of the plot and to recover compensation from the respondent-opposite party (hereinafter called the opposite party) along with interest.

(3.) After notice, opposite party in its reply had taken the preliminary objections that the complaint was time-barred; complainant had got no cause of action and there was no deficiency in service. According to the opposite party, the complainant was allotted a plot on 2.5.1997 on the terms and conditions mentioned in the allotment letter itself. He had paid Rs.400/- at the time of application and he was directed to pay the amount of Rs.1,000/- within a period of 15 days but the complainant had neither deposited any money with the opposite party nor abided by the rules and regulations of Improvement Trust. He had miserably failed to perform his part/obligation owing towards opposite party and after a belated stage had come up with the false and frivolous complaint. It was then stated in the reply that in addition to above, a notice dated 4.5.1979 was issued to the complainant calling upon him to deposit the amount of instalments with interest, penalty and penal interest within 15 days from the receipt of the notice, failing which the allotment would be cancelled and the earnest money would be forfeited. Despite this notice, the complainant had failed to deposit the due instalments and on this account his earnest money was forfeited and now he was debarred to seek any allotment of the plot. Ultimately, a prayer was made for dismissal of the complaint.