LUDHIANA: District consumer disputes redressal commission has penalised the chief administrator of Glada for deficiency in service and for unfair trade practices, after the authority failed to deliver the possession of a plot with unencumbered title and basic amenities.
Complainant Sushma Lata Bansal of Urban Estate Phase Two, Patiala, said she was allotted a residential plot measuring 95 square yards under the 80-20 scheme on a freehold basis through draw of lots held on October 14, 2019.
The tentative price of the plot was Rs 28,92,750 out of which 25 per cent of the price amounting to Rs 7,23,188 was paid by the complainant within the stipulated period.
The balance payment of 75 per cent was to be paid in six half-yearly installments, commencing from May 1, 2021. As per the allotment letter, the possession of the plot was to be handed over to the allottee within 90 days of the issue of the allotment letter provided 25 per cent of the tentative price had been paid. If the possession was not taken within the stipulated period, it would be deemed to have been handed over on the expiry of the said period.
According to the complainant, the opposite party failed to deliver the complete and effective possession and did not provide basic amenities like water supply, sewerage, roads and parking, etc.
The complainant further said that the opposite party deceived her by allotting her a plot in Glada estate, legal title of which is defective and sub judice.
The opposite party is also a respondent in the case pending before civil judge (junior division), Ludhiana.
A status quo was issued on the project of the opposite party by Justice Raj Mohan Singh of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on November 22, 2021, and the stay has not been vacated till date. The opposite party was aware of this and has intentionally allotted the plot, the complainant said, adding that they have even started charging interest on balance 75 per cent payment.
The complainant said the opposite party has violated the orders of the high court by floating a scheme and allotting plots without completing development work at the site.
On May 17, 2022, the complainant sent a letter to sole arbitrator-cum-chief administrator, Glada, Ludhiana, with request to resolve the issue but to no reply has been received.
Later, the complainant wrote a letter dated July 4, 2022, to chief administrator, Glada, with a copy to chief minister posted on July 16, 2022, with request seeking refund of Rs 7,81,043 with interest at 12 per cent per annum rate, but there was no response.
None from the opposite party appeared at the hearing before the commission, which said: “Certainly, there is concealment of material facts and gullible persons like the complainant have been induced to shell out their hard-earned money into the scheme and the opposite party resorted to misrepresentation and fraudulent practice.”
The commission held that it is strange that the opposite party issued a letter dated February 7, 2023, calling upon the complainant to deposit original LoI (letter of intent), allotment letter and receipts of payment so that the refund of the money could be initiated after deducting 10 per cent of the consideration money.
The commission observed that in the letter, the opposite party did not quote any rule or regulation which entitles it to deduct 10 per cent of the deposited amount.
“It is a settled law that one cannot take advantage of one’s own wrongs. So, the demand of deduction of 10 per cent is also illegal and cannot be enforced against the complainant,” the commission said.
