PUDA THROUGH ITS ESTATE OFFICER, MOHALI, DISTT. ROPAR, PUNJAB, (NOW GREATER MOHALI AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY) MOHALI PUNJAB Vs. SUMAN SHARMA RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 133, WARD NO. 4, MORINDA, TEHSIL & DISTRICT ROPAR PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These five Revision Petitions, under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), by Punjab Urban Development Authority, now Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (for short "PUDA"), are directed against two orders, dated 31.03.2010 and 29.03.2010, passed by the Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission at Chandigarh (for short "the State Commission") in two sets of First Appeals, bearing Nos.652 to 654 of 2004 and 842 & 843 of 2004 respectively. By the impugned orders, while overturning the orders, dated 27.04.2004 and 09.06.2004, passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum at Ropar (for short "the District Forum") in Complaints No.404 of 2003, 406 of 2003, 405 of 2003, 78 of 2004 and 79 of 2004 respectively, the State Commission has directed PUDA to refund to all the Complainants a sum of Rs. 50,000/- deposited by them as earnest money with it, along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the Complaints till the date of payment.

(2.) Since the facts, giving rise to the Complaints, and the issues involved are identical in all the five Revision Petitions, these are being disposed of by this common order. However, in order to appreciate the controversy, the facts in Revision Petition No. 2622 of 2010, arising out of First Appeal No. 652 of 2004, are taken as illustrative.

(3.) Sometime in the year 2001, PUDA floated a Scheme for allotment of commercial booths under Tatkal Scheme. The brochure issued under the Scheme stipulated that the applications once submitted, for allotment of the booth, could not be withdrawn at any stage. The Complainant submitted an application for allotment of a booth along with earnest money of Rs. 50,000/-. The draw of lots was held on 26.09.2001, in which the Complainant was found successful. He was allotted a booth vide allotment letter dated 29.10.2001. On allotment of the booth, a letter of intent was issued to him. Clause-6 of the said letter of intent reads as follows: