CWP-23468-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT The Chairman, Faridkot Improvement Trust & another Paramjit Singh & others CORAM: Present: GURVINDER SINGH GILL, 1. The petitioners, who are the Chairman and Executive Officer of the Faridkot Improvement Trust, have approached this Court dated 12.07.2023 (Annexure P Redressal Commission 2. A few facts necessary to notice are that the Faridkot Improvement Trust floated a scheme sizes in Baba Jeevan Singh Nagar, Faridkot Singh had applied for deposited the requisite allotted to him Although respondent No.1 had paid the initial amount and the remaining 2025 (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH The Chairman, Faridkot Improvement Trust & another Versus Paramjit Singh & 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. petitioners, who are the Chairman and Executive Officer of the Faridkot Improvement Trust, have approached this Court 12.07.2023 (Annexure P-5) passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short ‘the NCDRC’). A few facts necessary to notice are that the Faridkot Improvement Trust scheme in the year 2013 for allotment of residential plots Baba Jeevan Singh Nagar, Faridkot Singh had applied for allotment of a plot deposited the requisite earnest money. Pursuant thereto, allotted to him. An agreement to sell Although respondent No.1 had paid the initial amount and the remaining IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-23468-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 13.08.2025 The Chairman, Faridkot Improvement Trust & another ...Petitioners ...Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA Abhilaksh Gaind, Advocate, for the petitioners. petitioners, who are the Chairman and Executive Officer of the Faridkot Improvement Trust, have approached this Court seeking quashing of order passed by the National Consumer Disputes (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 – Paramjit plot measuring 500 sq. yds. and . Pursuant thereto, plot No.12 was was executed on 05.09.2014. Although respondent No.1 had paid the initial amount and the remaining petitioners, who are the Chairman and Executive Officer of the Faridkot seeking quashing of order passed by the National Consumer Disputes A few facts necessary to notice are that the Faridkot Improvement Trust of various Paramjit nd plot No.12 was on 05.09.2014. Although respondent No.1 had paid the initial amount and the remaining VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23468-2025 (O&M) instalments as per schedule, which in all come Faridkot Improvement Trust did not complete the development work inasmuch as neither the water roads had been constructed nor the requisite permissions had been obtained. Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, constrained to approach the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for ‘the SCDRC’) dated 28.11.2018 alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum and also petitioners herein harassment and mental agony 3. Aggrieved by the said appeal before the NCDRC 12.07.2023 (Annexure P 12.07.2023 reads as under: “7. 2025 (O&M) (2) instalments as per schedule, which in all come Faridkot Improvement Trust did not complete the development work inasmuch as neither the water pipes nor the sewerage pipes were laid nor been constructed nor the requisite permissions had been obtained. Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, constrained to approach the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for ‘the SCDRC’) by way of filing a complaint. The SCDRC dated 28.11.2018 ordered for refund of the amount of Rs.66,16,921/ alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum and also herein to pay a compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/ harassment and mental agony to respondent No.1 herein. Aggrieved by the said award dated 28.11.2018, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the NCDRC, which was partly accepted 12.07.2023 (Annexure P-5). The operative portion of the award dated 12.07.2023 reads as under: In view of the aforesaid submissions made at the bar 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 (i) deposited amount of the complainant with the opposite parties shall be refunded alongwith interest @ 10% per annum deposits till actual refund of the said amount, (ii) litigation to the tune of Rs.50,000/ to the complainant, (iii) the entire payment shall be made within eight weeks from today, failing which the amount shall attract interest @ 12% per annum. The am compliance of this Commission’s order dated 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 instalments as per schedule, which in all comes to Rs.66,14,921/-, but the Faridkot Improvement Trust did not complete the development work pipes nor the sewerage pipes were laid nor been constructed nor the requisite permissions had been obtained. Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, constrained to approach the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Punjab, Chandigarh (for short filing a complaint. The SCDRC vide its award refund of the amount of Rs.66,16,921/- alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum and also directed the to pay a compensation to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- towards to respondent No.1 herein. 28.11.2018, the petitioners preferred an , which was partly accepted vide award dated 5). The operative portion of the award dated In view of the aforesaid submissions made at the bar and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the award made ommission to the extent and effect that (i) the entire deposited amount of the complainant with the opposite parties shall alongwith interest @ 10% per annum from the date of deposits till actual refund of the said amount, (ii) the cost of gation to the tune of Rs.50,000/- is also awarded and shall be paid to the complainant, (iii) 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 dated 28.02.2019 shall be released to the complainant alongwith the interest accrued thereon. residual amount shall be made good by the opposite party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at , but the Faridkot Improvement Trust did not complete the development work pipes nor the sewerage pipes were laid nor been constructed nor the requisite permissions had been obtained. Respondent No.1 (allottee) was, thus, constrained to approach the State short award - directed the towards 28.11.2018, the petitioners preferred an dated 5). The operative portion of the award dated In view of the aforesaid submissions made at the bar and the circumstances of the case, it is deemed fit to modify the award made the entire deposited amount of the complainant with the opposite parties shall from the date of the cost of is also awarded and shall be paid to the complainant, (iii) the entire payment shall be made within eight weeks from today, failing which the amount shall attract ount, if any, deposited in 28.02.2019 shall be released to the complainant alongwith the interest accrued thereon. residual amount shall be made good by the opposite party within eight weeks from today, failing which the complainant would be at VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23468-2025 (O&M) 4. The Faridkot Improvement Trust Hon’ble Supreme Court by way of filing on 13.12.2023 by granti while reserving their rights to approach this Court. instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order dated 12.07.2023 5. We have heard learned counsel for t 6. Upon examining the facts, we find that the petitioners had been unable to complete the development work in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 despite the fact payable in terms of allotment letter dated 02.04.2014 (Annexure P 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 petition 7. Apart from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay and laches inasmuch as it was on 2025 (O&M) (3) liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On receipt of such an execution application, the State Comm 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 petitioners to withdraw the SLP while reserving their rights to approach this Court. instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order 12.07.2023. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. Upon examining the facts, we find that the petitioners had been unable to complete the development work 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 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. Under these circumstances, Faridkot Improvement Trust was liable to compensate the complainant. in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be by the petitioners, so as to justify taking a different view Apart 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, 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 still being aggrieved, approached the SLP, which came to be disposed of ng liberty to the petitioners 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 he petitioners. Upon examining the facts, we find that the petitioners had been unable to complete the development work in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 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 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 ers, so as to justify taking a different view. Apart from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay 13.12.2023 that the SLP was withdrawn, liberty to approach the executing court for recovery of the same. On ission shall undertake execution for ‘enforcement’ and for ‘penalty’, as per the approached the SLP, which came to be disposed of ng liberty to the petitioners to withdraw the SLP Consequently, the instant petition has been filed before this Court seeking quashing of order Upon examining the facts, we find that the petitioners had been unable to complete the development work in the residential colony i.e. Baba Jeewan Singh Nagar, Faridkot, where the plot was allotted to respondent No.1 as was 1). The . could not to build a home for himself. Under these circumstances, No in the findings recorded by the SCDRC or by the NCDRC could be Apart from the said fact, the instant petition would also suffer from delay 13.12.2023 that the SLP was withdrawn, VIMAL KUMAR 2025.08.20 12:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-23468-2025 (O&M) whereas the instant petition came to be filed on 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 compensation certainly cannot be said to be on higher side so as to interference by this Court is hereby dismissed. 13.08.2025 Vimal 2025 (O&M) (4) the instant petition came to be filed on 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 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 the instant petition came to be filed on 24.05.2024 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 compensation certainly cannot be said to be on higher side so as to warrant Finding no merit in the instant petition, the same GURVINDER SINGH GILL) JUDGE DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA) JUDGE 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 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