CWP-23479-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Improvement Trust Faridkot Jitender Kumar Takyar CORAM: Present: GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. 1. Faridkot Improvement Trust order dated 28 Disputes Redressal Commission 2. A few facts necessary to notice are that the floated a scheme sizes in Baba Jeevan Singh Nagar, Faridkot Kumar Takyar and deposited the requisite allotted to him respondent No.1 had paid Improvement Trust 2025 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Improvement Trust Faridkot Versus Kumar Takyar & others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Mr. Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, for the petitioners. URVINDER SINGH GILL, J. Improvement Trust has approached this Court 28.07.2023 (Annexure P-5) passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi A few facts necessary to notice are that the scheme in the year 2013 for allotment of residential plots Baba Jeevan Singh Nagar, Faridkot Kumar Takyar had applied for allotment of a deposited the requisite earnest money. Pursuant thereto, allotted to him and an agreement to sell respondent No.1 had paid an amount of Rs.13,16,000/ Improvement Trust neither completed the d IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23479-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, for the petitioners. approached this Court seeking quashing of passed by the National Consumer , New Delhi (for short ‘the NCDRC’). A few facts necessary to notice are that the Faridkot Improvement Trust allotment of residential plots of various Baba Jeevan Singh Nagar, Faridkot. Respondent No.1 – Jitender allotment of a plot measuring 200 sq. yds. . Pursuant thereto, plot No.93 was was also executed. Although an amount of Rs.13,16,000/-, but the Faridkot the development works nor handed seeking quashing of passed by the National Consumer Faridkot Improvement Trust of various Jitender 00 sq. yds. was . Although but the Faridkot s nor handed VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23479-2025 (O&M) over the physical possession. constrained to approach the State Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short ‘the SCDRC’) a complaint. The SCDRC complaint while issuing the following directions: “i) ii) iii) In case the opposite party fail to comply with the above order within a period of three months, then in the alternative the opposite party is directe as under: i) ii) 3. Aggrieved by the said appeal before the NCDRC 28.07.2023. The relevant extract of award dated 28.07.2023 reads as under: “In view of the facts and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the award made by the State Commission to the extent and effect that: 2025 (O&M) (2) over the physical possession. Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, constrained to approach the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short ‘the SCDRC’) a complaint. The SCDRC vide its award complaint while issuing the following directions: to deliver the actual and physical possession of the plot bearing No.93, measuring 200 sq. yards as per the allotment letter dated 02.04.2014 and agreement for sale dated 24.07.2014 within a period of three months, as prayed, alongwith all the facilities like developed roads, sewer, water and electricity lines etc. and completion certificate from the date of receipt of certified copy of order. to pay 12% interest on the deposited amount i.e. the stipulated date of possession i.e. the allotment letter till the actual handing over the possession as per relief (i). to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses. In case the opposite party fail to comply with the above order within a period of three months, then in the alternative the opposite party is directe as under: to refund the amount of Rs.13,16,000/ of 12% per annum from the respective dates of deposit till realization. to pay Rs.25,000/- as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses. Aggrieved by the said award dated 12.03.2020 appeal before the NCDRC, which was disposed of vide award dated . The relevant extract of award dated 28.07.2023 reads as under: In view of the aforesaid submissions made at the bar and in view of the facts and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the award made by the State Commission to the extent and effect that: Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short ‘the SCDRC’) by way of filing award dated 12.03.2020 allowed the complaint while issuing the following directions: to deliver the actual and physical possession of the plot bearing No.93, measuring 200 sq. yards as per the allotment letter dated r sale dated 24.07.2014 within a period of three months, as prayed, alongwith all the facilities like developed roads, sewer, water and electricity lines etc. and completion certificate from the date of receipt of certified copy of order. terest on the deposited amount i.e. Rs.13,16,000/- from the stipulated date of possession i.e. 24.08.2014 as per clause 3 of the allotment letter till the actual handing over the possession as per as compensation on account of mental agony and harassment as well as litigation expenses. In case the opposite party fail to comply with the above order within a period of three months, then in the alternative the opposite party is directed to refund the amount of Rs.13,16,000/- along with interest at the rate from the respective dates of deposit till as compensation on account of mental agony and tion expenses.” 12.03.2020, the petitioner preferred an disposed of vide award dated . The relevant extract of award dated 28.07.2023 reads as under: aforesaid submissions made at the bar and in view of the facts and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the award made by the State Commission to the extent and effect that: Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, Consumer Disputes Redressal filing allowed the to deliver the actual and physical possession of the plot bearing No.93, measuring 200 sq. yards as per the allotment letter dated r sale dated 24.07.2014 within a period of three months, as prayed, alongwith all the facilities like developed roads, sewer, water and electricity lines etc. and completion from 24.08.2014 as per clause 3 of the allotment letter till the actual handing over the possession as per as compensation on account of mental agony and In case the opposite party fail to comply with the above order within a d along with interest at the rate from the respective dates of deposit till as compensation on account of mental agony and , the petitioner preferred an disposed of vide award dated aforesaid submissions made at the bar and in view of the facts and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23479-2025 (O&M) i) ii) iii) The amount, if any, deposited in compliance of this Commission’s order dated 20.01.2021 shall be released to the complainant along accrued thereon. The residual amount shall party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On receipt of such undertake execution, for ‘enforcement’ and for ‘penalty’, as per the law. 4. The Faridkot Improvement Trust Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing on 13.12.2023 by granting liberty to the petitioner while reserving their rights to approach this Court. instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order dated 28.07.2023 5. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. 6. Upon examining the facts, we find that development work deliver physical possession of the plot Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 despite the fact that respondent No.1 had paid the entire amount payable in terms of allotment letter dated 02.04.2014 (Annexure P 2025 (O&M) (3) the entire deposited amount of the complainant with the o parties shall be refunded alongwith interest @ 10% per annum the date of deposits till actual refund of the said amount. the cost of litigation to the tune of R shall be paid to the complainant. the entire payment shall be made within eight weeks from today, failing which the amount shall attract interest @ 12% per annum. The amount, if any, deposited in compliance of this Commission’s order 20.01.2021 shall be released to the complainant along accrued thereon. The residual amount shall party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On receipt of such an execution application, the State Commission shall undertake execution, for ‘enforcement’ and for ‘penalty’, as per the law. The Faridkot Improvement Trust, still being aggrieved Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing SLP, which came to be disposed of 13.12.2023 by granting liberty to the petitioner while reserving their rights to approach this Court. instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order 28.07.2023 (Annexure P-5). We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Upon examining the facts, we find that apart from not completing the development work, the petitioner – Faridkot deliver physical possession of the plot in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 despite the fact that respondent No.1 had paid the entire amount payable in terms of allotment letter dated 02.04.2014 (Annexure P the entire deposited amount of the complainant with the opposite alongwith interest @ 10% per annum from the date of deposits till actual refund of the said amount. the cost of litigation to the tune of Rs.25,000/- is also awarded and entire payment shall be made within eight weeks from today, failing which the amount shall attract interest @ 12% per annum. The amount, if any, deposited in compliance of this Commission’s order 20.01.2021 shall be released to the complainant alongwith the interest accrued thereon. The residual amount shall be made good by the opposite party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On an execution application, the State Commission shall undertake execution, for ‘enforcement’ and for ‘penalty’, as per the law.” still being aggrieved, approached the SLP, which came to be disposed of 13.12.2023 by granting liberty to the petitioner/s to withdraw the SLP while reserving their rights to approach this Court. Consequently, the instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. apart from not completing the Improvement Trust has failed to in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 despite the fact that respondent No.1 had paid the entire amount as was payable in terms of allotment letter dated 02.04.2014 (Annexure P-1). The pposite from is also awarded and entire payment shall be made within eight weeks from today, The amount, if any, deposited in compliance of this Commission’s order with the interest be made good by the opposite party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On an execution application, the State Commission shall approached the SLP, which came to be disposed of s to withdraw the SLP Consequently, the instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order apart from not completing the Improvement Trust has failed to in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent s 1). The VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23479-2025 (O&M) said findings of fact are based on the evidence led by the parties Respondent No.1 remained deprived of the said amount proceed further Faridkot Improvement Trust was liable to compensate the complainant. infirmity in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be pointed out by the petitioner, so as to justify taking a different view 7. Apart from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay and laches inasmuch as it was on whereas the instant petition came to be filed on 2 being any explanation for the delay 8. Consequently, alongwith interest and also the award of compensation cannot be said to be erroneous. The interest as imposed by the NCDRC and also the compensation certainly cannot be said to b interference by this Court is hereby dismissed. 13.08.2025 Vimal 2025 (O&M) (4) said findings of fact are based on the evidence led by the parties Respondent No.1 remained deprived of the said amount proceed further to build a home for himself Faridkot Improvement Trust was liable to compensate the complainant. in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be by the petitioner, so as to justify taking a different view art from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay inasmuch as it was on 13.12.2023 that the SLP was withdrawn, the instant petition came to be filed on 2 being any explanation for the delay. Consequently, the award passed by the NCDRC for refund of the amount alongwith interest and also the award of compensation cannot be said to be The interest as imposed by the NCDRC and also the compensation certainly cannot be said to be on higher side so as to by this Court. Finding no merit in the instant petition, the same is hereby dismissed. (GURVINDER SINGH GILL (DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable: Yes/No said findings of fact are based on the evidence led by the parties. Respondent No.1 remained deprived of the said amount and could not to build a home for himself. Under these circumstances, Faridkot Improvement Trust was liable to compensate the complainant. No in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be by the petitioner, so as to justify taking a different view. art from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay 13.12.2023 that the SLP was withdrawn, the instant petition came to be filed on 27.05.2024 without there award passed by the NCDRC for refund of the amount alongwith interest and also the award of compensation cannot be said to be The interest as imposed by the NCDRC and also the e on higher side so as to warrant Finding no merit in the instant petition, the same GURVINDER SINGH GILL) JUDGE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) JUDGE . could not . could not . Under these circumstances, No in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be art from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay 13.12.2023 that the SLP was withdrawn, without there award passed by the NCDRC for refund of the amount alongwith interest and also the award of compensation cannot be said to be The interest as imposed by the NCDRC and also the warrant Finding no merit in the instant petition, the same VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document