SUDHA JAIN Vs. PRAGATISHEEL SAMOOHIK SEHKARI KRISHI SAMITI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of Compensation Application filed by Ms. Sudha Jain, r/o Terapant Niketan, Flat No. P, Sagar Apartments, 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as applicant) under Sec.12-B of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against M/s. Pragatisheel Samoohik Sehkari Krishi Samiti, Salarpur, 4047, Naya Bazar, Delhi-110006 (hereinafter referred to as respondent No.1) through its Honorary Secretary, Shri Padam Chand Gupta (hereinafter referred to as respondent No.2 ).

(2.) During 1981, respondent No.1, who is also providing services of immovable properties to the consumers, floated a scheme for providing farm houses in an area located at NOIDA, Uttar Pradesh by the name of "pragati Baagh". Since the applicant was interested in such a farm house, deposited Rs.20,135/- (Rs.20,000/- cost of land, Rs.100/- share money and Rs.35/- admission fee) on 9th January, 1982, and the receipt for the aforesaid amount was issued by the respondent. On 1st March, 1982, vide their Circular No. PS/04/cir/82, the respondents informed the applicant that they had purchased 1600 Bigas of land by executing sale deeds and arranged 900 Bigas of land under agreements for which sale deeds were to be executed by March, 1982. On 8th October, 1982, the respondents asked the applicant to pay Rs.15,000/- towards cost of land by 31st October, 1982, which was paid on 25th October, 1982, by the appellant and acknowledged by the respondent vide Receipt No.1766 dated 30th October, 1982. The respondents sent another Circular bearing No. PS/05/cir/82 dated 9th November, 1982 that they have purchased 2500 bigas of land and development charges for the same were being worked out and applicant/member will be informed accordingly. Since cost of half hectare of land at that time in that area was Rs.50,000/-, final demand for payment of balance Rs.15,000/- was sent by the respondent on 26th December, 1982. The applicant paid Rs.21,000/- on 18.12.1984 (Rs.15,000/- towards cost of land and Rs, 6,000/- towards development charges ). A further amount of Rs.3,00/- was also paid by the applicant on 15.1.1985 towards miscellaneous charges and the respondents have issued receipts for the aforesaid payments which are on record. Since the lay out plan does not meet the requirements of the Government with regard to roads, the respondents had to revise the lay out plan and asked the applicant to forward a list of fresh group consisting of five members which was sent on 1.6.1986. Possession of the land was to be delivered within 2 years from the date of enrolment of membership on 29.1.1982 but till 1991 nothing could be heard from the respondents. Since the applicant had paid entire amount towards cost of land far back in 1984, he sought information about the correct position of the Society and requested the respondents to hand over the possession of the plot. In response to the letter of the applicant, the respondents vide their letter dated 1.6.1991 informed that the land of the Society has been attested by the District Magistrate, Ghaziabad. The applicant asked the respondents to send the papers of litigation which were never sent by the respondent. Instead of handing over the possession of land in question, the respondent on 31.8.1991 informed the applicant that some litigation is pending in Supreme Court and as such allotment of plot is not possible. After waiting for 10 years, the applicant vide its letter 12th June, 1992 requested the respondent to refund the amount paid by him together with interest @ 24%. Instead of refunding the amount, the respondents informed the applicant vide their letter dated 16.9.1993 that since the matter was under litigation and the amount received from the applicants had been spent towards purchase of land, the amount could not be refunded. The applicant left with no other alternative, sent a legal notice of date 13.10.1993 but nothing could be achieved.

(3.) The Commission has ordered to issue notice to the respondent returnable on 16.1.1995. The respondents filed their reply admitting receipt of Rs.5,06,135/- towards cost of land and development charges but denied the averments made in the compensation application since according to the respondents, actual facts have been suppressed by the applicant and the case is under litigation.