SHIKAR SAHKARI AVAS SAMITHI vs PRAVEEN SINGH

THIS petition is filed against the order dated 21st May, 2001 of Uttar Pradesh State Commission in Appeal No. 1674/SC/99. The brief facts are as follows : Respondent/original complainant Shri Praveen Singh approached the District Forum, Lucknow vide his complaint dated 30.10.1998 alleging that the Shikhar Sahkari Avas Samiti, Lucknow allotted him a plot of land, Plot No. 69/220, having an area of 1980 sq. ft. at village Ganneka Purva in September, 1989 and that the entire amount of consideration namely Rs. 68,310/- was paid to the society and that the possession of the land was also taken in 1996 but the society on one pretext or the other has not executed registration deed transferring the plot to him. He alleged that out of Rs. 68,310/- paid by him, Rs. 10,000/- was towards registration charges. No appearance was put up on behalf of the Shikar Sahkari Avas Samiti before District Forum inspite of proper notice.

HOWEVER, the District Forum decided the matter on merits and held that there was deficiency in service on the part of the Avas Samiti in not registering the land deed and in stopping construction work of the complainant. The appeal filed by the Avas Samiti before the State Commission was dismissed though the State Commission made sight modifications in the order of the District Forum. The State Commission directed the Avas Samiti to get the sale deed registered in favour of the complainant within a period of one month from the date of the order and paid a compensation of Rs. 6,000/-. The order also provided for the payment of compensation at Rs. 1,000/- p.m. for non compliance of the order and costs of Rs. 2,000/-. The case of the revision petitioners is that the District Forum did not record any findings as to the service of notice of the case on revisionist; that the Forum was wrong in passing an ex parte order; but Section 70 of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Society Act passed the jurisdiction of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; that the transaction, if any, was between the respondent and the ex-Secretary of the revisionist-Society and that the revisionist Society is not involved in the case; and that there is no consumer dispute as the respondent is not a consumer.

We find that all these above points have been agitated before the learned State Commission also and the Commission has given clear findings on each issue. From the perusal of the record it is clear that full payment for the plot of land was made by the respondent during the period September, 1989 to April, 1993. These payments have been acknowledged in writing by one Khelawan and one Puran Chand Joshi, Additional Secretary and Secretary respectively of the revisionist Society. It appears that these office bearers of the Society did not deposit the files and papers with the society and a criminal case has been filed against the above said individuals by the revisionist Society in May, 1996. A public notice has also been given by the President of revisionist Society mentioning that the former Secretary Shri Puran Chand Joshi has submitted gross financial irregularities and to conceal such deeds he had not handed over charge of the document of the Samiti for which an FIR has been filed against him. It is clear to us that the respondent cannot be penalized or put to loss for the ill-deeds of the employees of the revisionist Society. We do not see any reason to interfere with the well reasoned order of the State Commission which is confirmed. There is no legal infirmity or jurisdictional error in the said order. With this discussion, the above Revision Petition is dismissed. No order as to cost. Revision Petition dismissed.