MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. MUKESH KUMAR GUPTA
LAWS(SC)-2012-5-84
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on May 09,2012

MEERUT DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Appellant
VERSUS
MUKESH KUMAR GUPTA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) DELAY condoned.
(2.) THE petitioner, who had induced the respondent to part with his hard earned money by promising a plot of land which, to the knowledge of the officers of the petitioner, was under litigation is before this Court questioning order dated 10.1.2012 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'the National Commission'), whereby the appeal preferred against the decision of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was dis- missed. Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, learned Counsel for the petitioner made efforts to convince us that the complaint filed by the respondent in 2009 was hopelessly time barred because the cause of action accrued to the respondent in 1992 and that the Consumer Forums committed serious error by ordaining execution of the sale deed and at the same time relieving the respondent of his obligation to pay interest for delayed payment of the balance price of the plot but we have not at all felt impressed. Rather, we are convinced that the petitioner, who is an instrumentality of the State, has acted in total disregard of the constitutional principles and fairness. The manner in which the petitioner went about advertising the plots and inducing the citizens to part with their money with the hope that they will get plot of land on which they will be able to construct house for themselves and their families is reprehensible and petition like the present one deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to visualize that an instrumentality of the State would make false representation to the public and collect money by promnising allotment of plot knowing fully well that the land is under litigation.
(3.) IN our view, the complaint filed by the respondent who had patiently waited for 27 years with the hope that he will get the plot was rightly not dismissed by the District Forum as barred by limitation because he had a recurring cause for filing a complaint in the matter of non-delivery of possession of the plot.;


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