KANPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. YOGENDRA NATH BHATT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the Uttar Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as "State Commission ") in First Appeal No. 2025 of 2006 according to which, the appeal filed by the present petitioner against the order dated 25.11.2005 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Kanpur Nagar was ordered to be dismissed. The District Forum vide their order dated 25.11.2005 had allowed the consumer complaint No.1166 of 2003 filed by the complainant / present respondent.

(2.) THE main issue involved in the present case is regarding the price to be charged for the additional area of land allotted to the complainant / respondent allottee of the petitioner. The complainant wants to pay the same price for the additional area at which the original plot was allotted to him, but the petitioner wants to charge higher rate for the additional area.

(3.) AT the time of arguments before me, the learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the application filed for condonation of delay, saying that the delay had occurred because of certain official formalities and heavy work within the office of the petitioner and should be condoned. On merits, he stated that it was made very clear in the allotment letter issued in the year 1998 that the area of the plot could increase or decrease. As a result of certain alteration in the site plan of the scheme, the area of plot in question had become 342.38 sq. meter against previous area of 180 sq. meter. The complainant / respondent was asked to give his consent for getting the increased area vide letter issued by the Authority on 06.03.2003. Vide another letter dated 25.04.2003, it was intimated to the respondent about the price of the additional land i.e. Rs. 3,67,604/ - and 12% free hold fees i.e. Rs. 44,424/ -. Another letter was sent on 29.08.2003 to the respondent, saying that he should give his consent within three days, otherwise the Authority could consider giving the increased area to some other plot -holder. The complainant / respondent however, wrote to the Authority saying that he wanted to take the remaining portion of the plot at the previous rate of the area allotted. The learned counsel pleaded that the Authority should be allowed to charge increased price for the additional area.