AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
- NOTWITHSTANDING the earnest efforts made by Mr. Vashishta, learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant to persuade us to interfere with the reasoning and conclusion of the State Commission, Chandigarh, we do not find any illegality or material error in the order passed by the State Commission. In acquiring land and allotting plots by the process of auction; the Housing Board was clearly offering a service to the public and as has been held by this Commission in F.A. No. 5 of 1989 entitled U.P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Garima Sukhla I (1991) CPJ 1 (NC) any deficiency in such service will entitle the aggrieved person to seek redressal under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. The arguments to the contrary advanced by the learned Counsel for the Appellant cannot be accepted. No other grounds have been urged before us in support of the Appeal.
WE accordingly confirm the Order of the State Commission and dismiss this appeal. There will be no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.