Suraksha Sadan Co-Op Group Hsg Society Ltd vs DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

VIDE letter dated 3.12.1992 of the DDA, the complainant Co-op. Group Housing Society was offered a plot of land measuring 7500 sq. mtrs. @ Rs. 1,650.65 per sq.mtr. Possession of the plot of land was handed over by the Authority to the Society on 27.5.1994. It was alleged that when the complainant Society was going to hand over the possession of allotted plot of land to the contractor to proceed with construction thereon the contractor pointed out that there were number of pits of different dimensions and in all probability the earth from those pits had been removed for raising the level of adjacent roads as also the level of DDA housing (II). By the letter dated 28.1.1995, this fact was brought to the notice of the opposite party-Authority by the complainant-Society. This letter was followed by the reminders dated 15.7.1995 and 11.9.1995. In response to the said letters, the Society received a letter dated 21-22.9.1995 from the Joint Director (Plg.), Dwarka asking for certain information which the Society supplied on 10.10.1995. It was further alleged that another letter dated 7.12.1995, the contents whereof have been set out in para 13 of the complaint, was received by the Society from the Joint Director (Plg.) of the Authority. Authority had failed to take timely action to fill up the pits. Attributing deficiency in service, direction is sought to be made to the Authority to pay amount of Rs. 22,82,700 being the cost incurred in earth filling work with interest from 1.1.1995 @ 18% p.a. amounting to Rs. 20,54,000 totalling Rs. 43,37,000 to the Society.

OPPOSITE party-Authority contested the complainant by filing written version. It was alleged that after allotment the possession of fully developed plot of land was handed over to the Society on 27.5.1994. There were no pits nor any earth was removed from the plot of land in question by the Authority. It was for the Society to look after the allotted plot of land after taking the possession. It was stated that for the first time after 8 months of the taking of possession the Society intimated the Authority on 28.1.1995 of there being pits. Claim of Rs. 27,45,000 made by the complainant was bogus and rejected. Complaint is hopelessly barred by limitation. It was stated that the Authority''s staff visited the plot of land to collect the details and found that the quantity of earth needed for filling was 1745 cubic mtrs in December, 1996. Rate of earth was Rs. 31.77 per cubic mtr. In the first week of January, 1997, the staff pointed out the filling was not required at the site. It was denied that there was any deficiency in service on the part of Authority or the Society is entitled to the amount claimed.

IN support of the complaint, affidavit of K.C. Sharma, Secretary of the Society, was filed in March, 2002. Affidavit dated 24.10.2009 of V. Shankaran, Secretary was further filed in support of the amount of Rs. 22,82,708.80 paid towards cost of earth filling to M/s. Manchanda and Manchanda Builders Pvt. Ltd., contractor. To substantiate the pleas raised in written version, the Authority filed the affidavit of S.P. Rustogi, Chief Engineer on 31.3.2002.

IT is admitted case of the parties that possession of the allotted plot of land was handed over by the Authority to the Society on 27.5.1994. Society alleges that the plot of land for which it was charged @ 1650.60 per sq. mtr. was not fully developed and was having pits of different dimensions. On the other hand, Authority claims that possession of fully developed plot of land without any pits was given to the Society on 27.5.1994. It denies of having removed any earth from the plot of land as alleged by the Society. Along with written version the Authority has filed handing over possession letter signed by the Secretary of the Society. There is not even a whisper in this letter of the existence of any pit. In the middle of para No. 7 of the complaint, it is alleged that possession of a fully developed plot of land was handed over to the Society on 27.5.1994. Para No. 8 of the complaint which too is material reads as follows: "That when the claimant society was going to hand over the possession of the plot of land to the contractor for action to proceed with the construction, the contractor pointed out that it was not the developed land. There were a number of pits in the land. It was pointed out by the contractor that there were certain pits of different dimensions which were definitely and certainly below the natural level of the said plot. The contractor further pointed out that in all probability the earth from these pits had been removed for raising the level of adjacent road and also the level of DDA housing (II) which was adjacent to the plot of the claimant society."

INDISPUTABLY, existence of pits in the plot of land in question was brought to the notice of Authority for the first time after about 8 months of the taking of possession by the Society by the letter dated 28.1.1995.

IN support of the plea taken in para 8 of the earth having been removed for raising the level of adjacent roads and DDA housing (II), the Society has not adduced any evidence whatsoever. In view of the possession handing over letter dated 27.5.1994 being silent of the existence of any pit and the admission made in aforesaid para 7 of the complaint about possession of a fully developed plot of land being given it may safely be concluded that the earth was removed sometime after 27.5.1994. In none of the letters filed along with the complaint to which our attention was drawn during the course of argument by Ms. Mukta Sharma, Advocate for the Society, the Authority has admitted existence of pits at the time of handing over possession of the plot of land or removing earth by it for raising the levels of adjacent roads and of DDA housing (II). It was pointed out by Mrs. Girija Wadhwa, Advocate for the Authority that construction work by other Society was in progress near the complainant-Society''s plot of land and there was every likelihood of earth being removed by them. If after taking possession of plot of land by the complainant-Society, earth was removed, the Authority cannot be held responsible for the same. Complainant-Society cannot derive any benefit of what is pleaded in para 21 of the written version on merit. Authority, thus, must be held to be not deficient in service as alleged by the complainant-Society nor the Society is entitled to recover the amount which it alleges to have paid to the contractor for earth filling work. Having returned this finding on merit, we need not examine the plea of limitation taken in written version by the opposite party-Authority.

CONSEQUENTLY, the complaint is dismissed being without any merit. No order as to cost. Complaint dismissed.