VIJAY KUMAR DHANARE Vs. INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 25.04.2008 passed by the M.P. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bhopal (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 1113/2007 Indore Development Authority Vs. Dr. Vijay Kumar Dhanare by which, both the appeals were partly allowed against which this revision petition has been filed.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that Complainant/Petitioner was allotted Plot No. 108 measuring 180 sq. mt. @ Rs.3220/- per sq. mt. by OP/respondent vide order dated 12.7.1999. Complainant signed agreement on 5.8.1999 and after depositing complete premium amount and lease rent on 21.2.2000, OP handed over possession of plot to the complainant. Inspite of repeated reminders, OP did not execute lease deed. OP for the first time vide letter dated 9.6.2004 intimated to the complainant that upon completion of development work and upon demarcation it was found that area of the plot was 14.80 X 20.50 mt. totaling 303.40 sq. mt. , whereas complainant was allotted 180 sq. mt., so, there was extra 123.40 sq. mt. and OP asked complainant to deposit additional amount of Rs.4,96,685/- for additional area and to pay additional lease rent of Rs.9,934/-. The complainant agreed to pay @ Rs.3,220/- per sq. mt. and if OP was not willing then the complainant refused to take additional area. It was further submitted that OP on 22.5.2006 again asked complainant to take 180 sq. mt. comprising 20.5 X 8.78 sq. mt. and separate plot of 123.4 (20.5 X 6.02) sq. mt. shall be demarcated. It was further submitted that complainant at initial stage intimated OP that area of the plot is more than 180 sq. mt., but at that time measurement was not done and lease deed was not executed, so, construction could not be completed. Now due to increase in price complainant had to incur extra expenditure of Rs.9.70,880/-. Alleging deficiency on the part of OP complainant filed complaint before District Forum for allotment of additional area at Rs.3,220/- per sq. mt and to have compensation etc. OP resisted complaint and submitted that approximate area of 180 sq. ft. was allotted and upon measurement it was found that there was additional area of 123.4 sq. mt. As per Expenditure Payments Regulations, 1987, of the year of 2004, additional land was offered @ Rs.4025/- per sq. mt. and prayed for dismissal of complaint. Learned District Forum after hearing both the parties directed OP to execute lease deed in favour of the complainant for the area 180 sq. mt. of plot no. 108. It was further directed that if the complainant want to get additional area of 123.40 sq. mt., OP to execute lease deed for the whole area after charging additional premium @ Rs.4025/- for the additional land and in the alternate if OP is not in a position to form separate two plots then to execute lease deed of whole land 303.40 sq. mt. after charging @ Rs.3,220/- per sq. mt. of the additional area and to pay Rs.1,000/- as cost of litigation. Both parties filed appeal before State Commission and learned State Commission vide impugned order direction for executing lease deed of additional area was set aside and Rs.10,000/- were awarded to the complainant for mental agony against which this revision petition has been filed.

(3.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.