MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SHAKUNTALA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal which has been filed by Meerut Development Authority against the order and judgment dated 15.9.1997 passed by District Consumer Forum in Complaint Case No.131 of 1995. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as under.

(2.) The appellant, Meerut Development Authority, in the year 1986 floated a residential scheme known as "rakshpuram Avaziya Yojna. Encouraged by the scheme, the complainant, respondent in this appeal, Shakuntala Devi applied for a residential plot on 25.2.1986 and deposited registration amount of Rs.10,000/- on 23.7.1988, the appellant had informed that she has been allotted plot No. P-3/86 and was asked to deposit Rs.16,000/-. The estimated cost of the plot measuring 200 sq. ft. was Rs.70,000/-. On 16.8.1988 this amount of Rs.16,000/- was deposited by the complainant with the appellant. As per letter of the appellant dated 3.9.1991 the remaining amount of Rs.44,000/- towards the cost of the plot was to be deposited in eight instalments. Accordingly the complainant deposited the amount as desired by the appellant. In addition the complainant deposited Rs.6,922/- as lease money and Rs.10,000/- as enhanced cost of the plot. It is noteworthy that the Meerut Development Authority, the appellant, had informed the complainant on 6.9.1993 that the cost of the plot had increased by Rs.10,000/- and accordingly the complainant deposited that amount also in addition to the lease money. Thus the total amount deposited by the complainant comes to Rs.88,422/-. This amount was deposited from 25.2.1986 to 18.9.1993. Inspite of this the complainant was not given possession of the plot in question nor the plot was ever demarcated, the colony has not been developed, water, electricity and sewage facilities were not provided over the area in question. When the appellant was approached by the complainant, no satisfactory answer was given. When the complainant on 11.1.1995 wanted the money deposited by her to be returned to her with 2% interest per month, no heed was paid to her request. She, therefore, lodged a complaint before the District Forum praying that the amount deposited by her should be returned alongwith interest. The cost of proceedings has also been claimed.

(3.) The case of the appellant, Meerut Development Authority, opposite party in the District Forum, was that the cost of the plot was an estimated one and later on it was enhanced by Rs.10,000/-. The development work was discontinued because a dispute had occurred between the appellant and Cooperative Housing Society over the plot in question. The plot, therefore, became disputed as a result of litigation between appellant and the Cooperative Housing Society with the result that an alternative plot No.1/52 was offered to the complainant which was fully developed, and the complainant was free to take previous allotted plot.