Consumer court case got dismissed as responded said no plots
Ankit
(Querist) 06 March 2020
This query is : Resolved
Hello sir,
There is one of my case in which I has to be allotted a plot from the awas vikas parishad Uttar Pradesh.
I won the case in District Forum and lost it in appeal in State Commission. I appealed in national commission and national commission in its order stated that I should get a plot as it was awas vikas parishad's fault and they havn't complied with the rules but as they don't have any plots left my petition has to be dismissed.
I want to appeal to Supreme Court. Please guide me can court decline a plot to me on the basis of that builder is saying he is not having any plots?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 06 March 2020
I am shocked to read that National Consumer Commission instead of penalizing the respondent Awas Vikas Parishad in the given facts has dismissed the complaint itself. This is nothing but the MURDER of Justice if the facts posted by you are correct.
This is the fittest case for approaching Apex Court. Engage a competent lawyer and move ahead.
Advocate Suneel Moudgil
(Expert) 06 March 2020
completely agree with expert makkad ji,
approach a competent Supreme Court lawyer and move ahead Good Luck,
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 08 March 2020
You should (rather must) move in appeal in Supreme Court against the judgment of NCDRC through a local prudent lawyer.
krishna mohan
(Expert) 09 March 2020
I too shocked as the very purpose of consumer court mechanisms appears failed to provide right and timely relief. Normally District court only decides based on merit arguments and evidences etc., What is the reason for dismissal? That will give more details to give right advise. Alternatively you can approach able lawyer to appeal in Apex Court by discusisiong with all documents and the judgments cited by you.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 09 March 2020
The author has already clarified that the National Commission mentioned in its order that the respondent/opposite party is not having plot which may be provided to the petitioner/complainant hence the petition/complaint is dismissed is shocking only.
Ankit
(Querist) 11 March 2020
Thanks to all the replies by respected lawyers. I am having just one doubt and have consulted several advocates but not got a proper response:
When they are saying that they are not having any plot left then how Supreme Court can help. I am sure they will allot a plot if supreme court orders them to send to jail. Can/ Will Supreme Court order Awas Vikas to allot a plot or go to jail? As I don't want compensation, I want plot.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 11 March 2020
Agree with the experts.
Please mention the date of order by NCDRC and title of case .
You can go for appeal u/s 23 Consumer Protection Act.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 11 March 2020
If you are not interested to get the plot and on the other hand, the plot is not readily available then the court of law shall decide on the quantum of the compensation and the direction to the competent authorities to take action against the erring officials of the respondent. The jail term in the given case cannot be given by Apex Court.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 21 March 2020
As advised by experts of this forum, you may approach supreme court with an appeal against the decision passed by the national commission
This is nothing but a judgment without application of mind.
If there is no plot available let the respondent compensate you the current value of the plot, you can make an alternate prayer in that regard before the apex court.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 21 March 2020
Till date the author has not mentioned / provided the reference / date of NCDRC decision.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 22 March 2020
The author may not be interested in pursuing this matter through this forum,hence he has not reverted.
Well it is up to him.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 22 March 2020
Yes, the conclusion arrived at by the experts lastly is perfect.
Ankit
(Querist) 23 March 2020
Hello respected experts, apologizes for replying late.
Answers provided by you are very helpful.
Below are the details of the case:
Case number : RP/3604/2012 and order date is 16-January-2020
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 23 March 2020
Following is the concluding paragraph of the Judgement from NCDRC:
" The State Commission has observed that the complainant had given the consent for a plot ad-measuring 200-300 sq mtrs and the plot allotted to the complainant is in this category. Moreover, it is important to observe that in the same letter of the Housing Board, it is clearly stated that the plot will be allotted on “basis of as and where”. Therefore, the allottee cannot raise any grievances about the size or shape of the plot. It is also important to observe that in the letter dated 10.03.1993, no reason has been given for cancellation of the plot except for non-obtaining of his consent. No shortcoming in the plot has been mentioned. There was also no request to allot any alternative plot or the plot for which the consent was given. Obviously, in a lottery system, if a person does not get plot of his choice, he has the option to either take it or refuse it. The complainant has chosen to return it. Then he cannot become entitled to get another plot and that too without any request. Many persons may give consent for one plot, but it is not possible to allot that plot to all the persons. From these aspects, in my view the issue of consent is not intrinsic to the present complaint and particularly when there was no request for allotment of another plot. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the opposite party that there is no plot left in Rishikesh, so no alternate plot can be allotted to the complainant. The issue of consent has become irrelevant now. Thus, there is no merit in the present revision petition and the same is dismissed. However, in the light of the assertions made by the petitioner that he is ready to take the plot at Haridwar at the current price if the plot is available. As he is an old applicant and he wants to take the plot at the current price, Commissioner, Housing, Uttarakhand may sympathetically consider allotting him a plot at Haridwar or at Rishikesh at the current price."
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 23 March 2020
Following is the concluding paragraph of the Judgement from NCDRC:
i) Allottee wrote letter dated 10.03.1993 to Deptt.
ii) The plot allotted was refused to be accepted.
iii) No reason for non-acceptance was mentioned but it was stated that their consent was not taken before allotment of allotted plot.
iv) Department considered it as cancellation of application for allotment. State Commission accepted this version.
v) There was also no request to allot any alternative plot or the plot for which the consent was given
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 23 March 2020
NCDRC has directed as Under:
However, in the light of the assertions made by the petitioner that he is ready to take the plot at Haridwar at the current price if the plot is available. As he is an old applicant and he wants to take the plot at the current price, Commissioner, Housing, Uttarakhand may sympathetically consider allotting him a plot at Haridwar or at Rishikesh at the current price.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 23 March 2020
If the case is taken to Apex court, it would take lot of time in decision with uncertain result.
First, the author should approach concerned department (Parishad) for plot at current price at Haridwar or at Rishikesh.
In such case hopes are bleak, but should follow the NCDRC requirement and proceed with this firmality.
Ankit
(Querist) 23 March 2020
Thanks sir for looking into this. Your detailed response is highly appreciated.
I neither requested nor accepted to take plot at current price it was self assumption made by NCDRC.
I don't want any plot sympathetically, if I wanted then I haven't moved to the court.
Its in Awas Vikas rule book that they will allot a plot only after getting a written consent from me which I will provide after spot inspection of plot and they allotted me a 6 corner irregular plot without my consent as nobody wants to take that.
NCDRC has stated that State commission got confused that we have given the consent and has confirmed that we haven't and also stated that now point of consent and following rules is irrelevant as there are no plots left.
Do you think I have a valid point to go to Supreme Court?
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 23 March 2020
Since the State Commission has treated your letter as non acceptance and NCDRC has also accepted the version, first you should approach Avas Vikash for allotment of plot at current rate.
Section 23 of Consumer Protection Act provides 30 days to go for appeal to Supreme Court against NCDRC decision.
Guest
(Expert) 23 March 2020
Kind Attn : Mr.Rajendra K Goyal -- Nice to See You after a long break. Hope you should have reconciled your self. Still wish to remind you. Please do not post any unwanted or unworthy posts just for the reasons to increase your points the reason is very shameful.Better change your photo identity which is almost a disgrace, I know that you are not a practicing Advocate and you should behave properly with practicing Advocates who really add merit here. For example Mr.Rajkumar Makkad a Senior Advocate had to keep away for some time because of your behavior and all the records are still there. Hope you will not make us to teach the lesson once more. All the Best.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 March 2020
You have not clarified how NCDRC reached to a conclusion without having any evidence on the file that you returned the plot allotted to you?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 March 2020
The facts told by you in your post do not match with the facts mentioned in the order of the Commission.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 March 2020
A person not approaching the court with malafide intention is not entitled for the grant of the desired relief.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 March 2020
Once you returned the allotted plot to the Housing Board without making any prayer to grant the alternative plot, you lose your right to have the same relief at the later stage without having any force of law as such the order seems perfect, if the facts are same.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 March 2020
BUT as clarified by you subsequently that the facts have been got distorted and the real facts of your complaint are otherwise then this is best case for moving towards Apex Court as already advised to you.
Ankit
(Querist) 30 March 2020
Thanks all the respected lawyers, you all have been very helpful.
There has been some confusion in the facts or seems that I have shown facts from my point of view. We will be proceeding to SUpreme Court once the lockdown is over. Below is the complete case prepared by my father :
1 प्रार्थी को एक भूखंड संख्या 550 आवंटन किया गया था
2 प्रार्थी ने एक पत्र dt 10/3/03 के माध्यम से आवास परिषद को सूचित किया कि उक्त आवंटन में नियमों का पालन नहीं किया गया है और प्रार्थी की सहमति के बिना आवंटन किया गया है जिसे रद्द करें
3 जिला फोरम ने निर्णय दिया आप प्रार्थी को नियमानुसार एक भूखंड का आवंटन 2 माह के अंदर करें अन्यथा सेक्शन 27 में आपके विरुद्ध कार्रवाई की जाएगी
4 नेशनल कमीशन ने माना है कि प्रार्थी ने उक्त पत्र में रजिस्ट्रेशन कैंसिल करने के लिए नहीं लिखा था केवल 550 नंबर भूखंड का आवंटन रद्द करने के लिए लिखा था स्टेट कमिशन निर्णय गलत दिया है अपील निर्णय को गलत मान लिया है जिससे जिला फोरम का निर्णय जीवित हो जाता है 5 प्रार्थी ने उक्त पत्र में नहीं लिखा मुझे एक भूखंड चाहिए/ ऋषिकेश में भूखंड है नहीं/ अब नियम का मतलब कुछ नहीं बचा है उपरोक्त कारणों से रिवीजन पिटिशन समाप्त हो गया है तीन कारणों के कारण नेशनल कमीशन ने रिवीजन पिटिशन को खारिज कर दिया है
6 नेशनल कमीशन ने एक रिकमेंडेशन रेस्पोंडेंट को की है जिन 3 कारणों पर रिवीजन पिटिशन खारिज की है आप उन 3 कारणों को आधार बनाकर पेटीशनर को एक भूखंड दे सकते हैं
7 क्या नेशनल कमीशन ने रिवीजन पिटिशन खारिज करने की बजाय सेक्शन 27 की कार्रवाई नहीं करनी चाहिए थी क्या नेशनल कमीशन रिवीजन पिटिशन खारिज आदेश & रिकमेंडेशन विरोधाभासी नहीं है क्या कोई जज न्यायालय में बैठकर किसी को किसी के बारे में लिखित में रिकमेंड कर सकता है
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 30 March 2020
Sir, it was clearly ruled that the plot was refused by the applicant.
Moreover, the statutory time to approach Apex court is seem to be over.
Option left to avail the opportunity for a plot at Haridwar at present rate.
Ankit
(Querist) 31 March 2020
I haven't received the order of copy yet so I can still approach the supreme court and I don't have an offer to take the plot at haridwar and awas vikas will never provide me the same and taking plot at current rate is not an option as it is close to market rate.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 31 March 2020
The decision was uploaded on NCDRC site on 12.02.2020, Please contact your lawyer to confirm limitation.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 31 March 2020
As the impugned judgment has been uploaded recently so there is no bar of limitation and moreover Hon'ble Supreme Court has recently held that the question of the limitation shall not be raised for the cases to be filed before Apex Court of India in respect of whose the limitation had to expire during the days of lock-down so wait for the normalcy in the country and then move ahead as desired.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 31 March 2020
The Author should discuss with his lawyer whether limitation is available to what date, and should proceed accordingly.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 31 March 2020
In a recent case taken up by the NCDRC, the Commission elaborated on the law pertaining to limitation period for filing appeal as stipulated under Section 15 of the Consumer Protection Act to hold that limitation period prescribed under the Act does not commence from the date of pronouncement of the order in the open Court by itself and that the said date cannot be the starting point of determining the period of limitation under Section 15 of the Act.
In the case, Appeal was filed by the Appellant after 115 days since expiry of the statutory period of limitation for filing an Appeal.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 31 March 2020
The NCDRC ruled that the under Consumer Protection jurisdiction, the period of limitation for filing appeal or revision shall start running from the date on which free copy of the certified order is communicated to the party in the manner laid down in Rule 4 (10) of the Haryana Consumer Protection Rules, 1988.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 31 March 2020
It is the common law that in the absence of such communication of signed and dated order, the party adversely affected by it will have no means of knowing the contents of the order so as to challenge the same and get it set aside by the appellate authority or the higher Forums/Courts
Ankit
(Querist) 01 April 2020
Thanks Makkad Sir, I agree with you.
In the same case, opposite party has filed appeal in State Commission 10 years after District forum on the same ground that they haven't received the order copy and they were not aware about the contents of the order.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 01 April 2020
As per Supreme Court of India, rules relevant to Consumer Protection act GSR 409 dated 03.07.1990:
(a) Order XX(F) with the title “Appeals under section 23 of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 (68 of 1986)” shall be inserted after Order XX(E).
XX(F).—The petition of appeal from an order made by the National Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as “The National Commission”) under sub-clause (i) of clause (a) of section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (69 of 1986) shall, subject to the provisions of sections 4, 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963) be presented by an aggrieved person within thirty days from the date of the order sought to be appealed against:
Provided that computing the said period, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of such order shall be excluded.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 01 April 2020
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Anshul Aggarwal v. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority, IV (2011) CPJ 63 (SC), has laid down that :
"It is also apposite to observe that while deciding an application filed in such cases for condonation of delay, the Court has to keep in mind that the special period of limitation has been prescribed under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 for filing appeals and revisions in consumer matters and the object of expeditious adjudication of the consumer disputes will get defeated if this Court was to entertain highly belated petitions filed against the orders of the Consumer Foras."
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 01 April 2020
In Cordcon Builders Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs. Valerian Anthony Diago & Anr. 2015 (2) CPR 517 (NC), Hon'ble National Commission has observed thus :-
"10. .......Thus, it becomes clear that almost after about 9 months he applied for certified copy of the impugned order inspite of having knowledge of the impugned order. Section 12 (2) of Limitation Act runs as under:
// 5 // "(2) In computing the period of limitation for an appeal or an application for leave to appeal or for revision or for review of a judgment, the day on which judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be revised or reviewed shall be excluded.
Thus, limitation runs from the date of pronouncement/knowledge and is such circumstances limitation for filing appeal started from 10.04.2012 and period taken in obtaining certified copy is to be excluded for the purpose of calculation of condonation of delay. Apparently , appellant applied for certified copy on 4.01.2013 and he received copy on the same day; hence, only one day for getting certified copy of the impugned order is to be excluded for computation of limitation for filing appeal.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 01 April 2020
None can dispute that Law of Limitation is not applicable before Hon'ble Apex Court while challenging the verdict of National Consumer Commission. It is established law that every appeal filed before Apex Court has to cross the same legal process even in those case which have been decided by Commission/Tribunal/Appellate Tribunals also.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 01 April 2020
As you had not challenged the admission of the appeal filed by the opposite party at such belated stage making it as a preliminary issue so you have no legal right to get the same agitated at this stage.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 01 April 2020
As in the present case, the order of National Commission was not uploaded till recent so the question of deliberate delay in obtaining its copy do not arise especially when you application seeking certified copy of the order is long pending with the Commission. There is no delay on your side in the given case so those cases which have been cited are irrelevant in the present case.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 01 April 2020
The decision of NCDRC was uploaded on 12.02.2020. Application for copy need to be submitted in time. Delay may be fatal for the case / appeal.
