GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. NISHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Appeals Nos. 889, 890 and 891 of 2020 have been filed under Sec. 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act") by the Appellant/Opposite Party - Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Opposite Party') assailing the Order dtd. 21/1/2020 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the 'State Commission') in Complaint No. 161, 162 and 163 of 2019 respectively, whereby the Complaint filed by the Respondent/Complainant was allowed.

(2.) Since the facts and question of law involved in these appeals are similar except for minor variations in the dates, events and flat numbers, these appeals are being disposed of by this common Order. However, for the sake of convenience, First appeal No. 889 of 2020 is treated as the lead case and the facts enumerated hereinafter are taken from Consumer Complaint No.889 of 2020.

(3.) Brief facts of the case as narrated in the Complaint are that the Respondent/Complainant had applied for the purchase of a Plot at IT City, Mohali admeasuring 150 sq. yards at tentative price of Rs.37,50,000.00 and paid Rs.3,75,000.00 as earnest money to the Opposite Party. In draw of lots, the Complainant was allotted a Plot measuring 150 sq. yards under the category of Sr. Citizen. Thereafter, a Letter of Intent (LoI) dtd. 9/10/2018 was issued to the Complainant. The Complainant further paid a sum of Rs.6,37,500.00. The balance 75% i.e. Rs.26,71,875.00 was paid by the Complainant on 6/12/2018. The Complainant paid the whole amount within 60 days from the date of issue of Letter of Intent, therefore, he was entitled for a rebate of 5% which was given to the him. As per terms and conditions in LoI, the possession of the Plot was to be handed over to the Complainant, within 90 days from the issuance of the LoI, i.e. 9/1/2019. The Complainant vide his letter dtd. 10/1/2019, requested the Opposite Party to handover the possession of the Plot without any further delay but no reply was given to him. The Complainant approached the Opposite Party number of times with the request to hand over the possession but to no effect. Alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the Opposite Party, the Complainant filed the Complaint before the State Commission, Punjab seeking the following reliefs :