LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT TRUST Vs. NEELAM BHALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petitions are filed by the Petitioners under Section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against common Order passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the "State Commission") in Appeal No. 1543/2009 & 1544/2009 dated 09.03.2017.

(2.) Smt. Neelam Bhalla, Complainant in Complaint No. 577 of 2009 stated that one Shri Dina Nath son of Shri Nand Lal was member of Respondent No.2 Society/ Opposite Party No.1, who was allotted plot No. 990-D, measuring 250 sq. yds. After his death, he was succeeded by Shri Kulbhushan Nath and Smt. Savitri Sharma. Smt. Savitri Sharma surrendered her rights in the plot in favour of Shri Kulbhushan Nath, who then became sole allottee of plot No. 990-D, under membership No. 1349. Thereafter, Shri Kulbhshan Nath transferred the said plot to the Complainant, vide membership No. 1452, in the record of Respondent No.2, who also issued no due certificate on 06.09.2007. Hence the Complainant became a consumer under the Opposite Parties qua plot. The land of Respondent No.2 i.e. Atam Nagar Cooperative House Building Society Ltd. was acquired by the Petitioner i.e. Ludhiana Improvement Trust. Subsequently, vide notification dated 21.09.1982, 50% of the acquired land was exempted by the State Govt. of Punjab. The Petitioner asked Respondent No.2 to pay development charges and exemption fee and then the plots, list of which was appended with allotment letter No. 11308 dated 03.02.1983, were to be allotted by Respondent No.2 to its members. Plot No. 990-D of the Complainant was at Serial No. 55. Respondent No. 2 allotted plots to the members including plot No. 990-D. The society acted as intermediator between its members and the Petitioner. Respondent No.1 has since been depositing dues as demanded by Respondent No.2 and nothing was payable qua this plot to the Society. Respondent No.1 has been requesting Respondent No.2 Society to demarcate the plot and to hand over vacant possession, but in vain. Other members of the society, who were allotted plots, were given possession. No possession was delivered to Respondent No.1 by Respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 took the excuse that the plot was not in existence and therefore its inability to handover the possession. Wherever the Petitioner Trust could not deliver possession of the plots to the allottees, as mentioned vide letter No. 11308 dated 03.02.1983, the members were given alternate plots. No alternate plot was allotted to Respondent No.1. Hence, the Complaint was filed.

(3.) Shri Vivek Bhalla, Complainant in Complaint No. 588 of 2009 dated 25.09.2007, alleged that plot No. 993-D, measuring 250 sq. yds. was initially allotted by Respondent No. 2 to its member Shri Madan Lal s/o Sh. Payare Lal, vide membership registration no. 374. Shri Madan Lal sold that plot and transferred to the Complainant, vide membership no. 1463, in the record of Respondent No. 2. No due certificate was issued by Respondent No. 2 to the Complainant on 19.09.2007. Hence the Complainant became consumer under the Opposite Party qua plot, having all rights which were available to original allottee Sh. Madan Lal. The land of Respondent No. 2 was acquired by the Petitioner Trust. Subsequently, 50% of the acquired land was exempted by the State Government of Punjab, vide notification dated 21.09.1982. The Petitioner required Respondent No. 2 to pay the development charges and exemption fee, as mentioned in the letter and that the plots, list of which was appended with allotment letter no. 11308 dated 3rd February, 1983, were to be allotted by Respondent No. 2 to its members. At serial no. 58, was included plot No. 993-D of the Complainant. All the other allegations in this Complaint were of the same nature and kind as that of Smt. Neelam Bhalla.