PREMWATI GARG Vs. BRIJ NANDAN LAL JAIN
LAWS(DELCDRC)-2006-3-36
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION
Decided on March 14,2006

PREMWATI GARG Appellant
VERSUS
BRIJ NANDAN LAL JAIN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

J.D.KAPOOR, J - (1.) IN the year 1963 the complainant booked a plot in Dayal Bagh, District Faridabad with O.P. 1 @ 25 per sq. yd. The cost was payable in instalments on the basis of the development work i.e., completion of roads, completion of sewer lines, completion of water lines etc. Inspite of having paid the total cost of the plot the O.P. failed to carry out development work and did some superficial work to convince the purchasers. Subsequently the development was taken over by Faridabad Complex Administration by charging Rs. 180 per sq. yd. from the plot holders.
(2.) ON account of deficiency in service on the part of the O.P., the complainant has through this complaint sought direction to the O.P. to execute the sale deed of the plot in favour of O.P. 2 or in the alternative award damages amounting to Rs. 6,46,500 and Rs. 50,000 for mental harassment and agony. The amount of compensation of Rs. 6,46,500 has been assessed on the clandestine sale of the similar plots by the O.P. at this price.
(3.) AT the first instance O.Ps. have taken the objection that it was the association of the plot holders that had entered into transaction with them and not the complainant individually and, therefore, he is not the consumer qua the O.Ps. and since the complainant did not make the payment of the development charges fixed by the O.Ps. at Rs. 15 per sq. yd., the plot was not allotted to the complainant. This objection does not hold water as the complainant was the sole beneficiary though the matter was being taken up on his behalf by the Association. Any person who is a beneficiary of service comes within the meaning of ňúConsumer as defined by Section 2(1)(o) of the Consumer Protection Act.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.