C.C. FOOTWEAR vs PUNJAB SMALL SCALE And EXPORT CORPN. LTD.

THE complainant M/s. C.C. Footwear, New Delhi, applied for allotment of a plot in the Leather Complex at Jalandhar to be developed by M/s. Punjab State Leather Development Corporation Ltd, now known as Punjab Small Scale & Export Corporation Ltd. THE complainant deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000/- on 25th May, 1987 with the respondent and another sum of Rs. 46,000/- being 10% of the total value of the plot was deposited on 11.8.1987 vide receipt Annexure ''D''. THEreafter the respondent vide their letter dated 20.6.1989 wrote to the complainant to remit a sum of Rs. 1,38,000/- being 30% of the tentative price of the plot within 30 days from the issue of the letter. However, the complainant on 19.7.1989 replied to the respondent that he would like to draw his attention that neither allotment letter nor any progress report for the development of the land for setting up of Central Effluent Treatment and Disposal System was made available to him though it was one of the conditions that the plot will be ready in all respects within two years of deposit of the first instalment. THE complainant informed the respondent that he had personally visited the complex on 19.12.1989 and could not see anything except bare land and few small rooms with various obstructions on the way without sewerage and without laying line of effluent treatment plant. Further, it was the respondent who vide letter dated 28.7.1990 wrote to the complainant that they have withdrawn the offer of allotment of plot No. 389 in the Leather Complex, Jalandhar and that as per condition No. 3 of the allotment letter the amount stands forfeited. THE complainant on 30.8.1990 wrote to the respondent that a sum of Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 46,000/- had already been deposited by the complainant with the respondent and that even after expiry of more than 3 years respondent had not provided the infrastructural facilities. THE complainant further contended that the respondent had no right to ask for further payment till facility had been provided for. THE complainant alleges that he had been physically visiting the respondent at Chandigarh but the respondent had not given any response. On an enquiry by the complainant, he came to know that the respondent vide their letter dated 5th May, 1995 had informed the complainant that his plot has already been cancelled vide their letter dated 28.7.1990. THE complainant in his complaint prayed that the respondent be directed to give possession of Plot No. 389 to the complainant on payment of balance price of the plot as complainant has now noted that all the infrastructure has been built by the respondent partially and he can start the construction of its industrial shed at the premises allotted by the respondent.

THE respondent has contended that the complainant is not a consumer within the definition of Consumer Protection Act, 1986; that the present complaint is not maintainable as the plot in question has been allotted to some other entrepreneur under "Off the Shelf Scheme"; that the present complaint is barred by limitation; that the provisional offer of allotment of the complainant has been cancelled/withdrawn on 28.7.1990 and this factor was fully within the knowledge of the complainant and that the letter dated 25.5.1995 is nothing but intimation of the letter dated 28.7.1990 and this does not give any fresh cause of action to the complainant. THE complainant failed to abide by the terms and conditions of the provisional offer of allotment by not making 30% payment of the premium within the stipulated period despite the opportunity granted by the respondent. THE provisional offer of allotment was cancelled/withdrawn as per terms of the allotment letter and thus the present complaint is liable to be dismissed on these very grounds. According to the respondent the allotment was cancelled as far back as 28th July, 1990 and letter dated 25th May, 1995 which is nothing but intimation of the said letter, cannot give rise to a fresh cause of action. The complainant relied upon the advertisement of the respondent dated 25th March, 1996. The present complaint was filed by the complainant on 26th March, 1996. The advertisement reads as under: "On persistent demand from various industrial Associations and Entrepreneurs and to accelerate the pace of growth of industry in Punjab, PSIEC has decided to extend following concessions to the defaulter allottees of plots in various focal points in the State. The plots which have/had been resumed on account of non-construction/non-payment of dues and not re-allotted so far, would be restored in case defaulter allottee(s) pay all dues including principal, interest/penal interest and other incidental charges or makes payment calculated at the current reserve price of plot, in lumpsum, whichever is higher upto 31.3.1996. These concessions are subject to the conditions that the defaulter allottee shall have to complete the construction and bring the unit into production by 30.9.1996 positively. All concerned may please note and avail the extended concessions. Sd/- Managing Director, Punjab Small Industries & Export Corporation Ltd., Udyog Bhavan, Sector 17, Chandigarh."

Now the cause of action would have revived with this advertisement but for the words "the plots which have/had been resumed on account of non-construction/non-payment of dues and not re-allotted so far, would be restored in case defaulter allottee(s) pay all dues including principal, interest/penal interest and other incidental charges or makes payment calculated at the current reserve price of plot, in lumpsum, whichever is higher upto 31.3.1996". The plea of the respondent in this case is that this particular plot has been allotted to some other party after having been cancelled. There is nothing on record to suggest anything to the contrary. The benefit of this advertisement is not available to the complainant. The complaint is barred by time and the result is that it fails and is dismissed. Complaint dismissed.