Kanpur Development Authority vs KRISHNA DEVI DIWAN

-HEARD Mr. H. P. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the respondent and perused the record. None appears on behalf of the appellant, Kanpur Development Authority, nor its Counsel is available. The matter being old is taken up for final disposal on the basis of material available.

KANPUR Development Authority filed this appeal against the verdict dated 29. 4. 2002 of District Consumer Forum, Kanpur Nagar whereby the complaint of Smt Krishna Devi Diwan, the respondent was allowed and further the appellant was directed to execute the sale deed in her favour in accordance with the terms of its letter dated 17. 3. 1993. Shortly stated, the complainant's case was that her husband applied for a plot of 200 sq. yards in Sujat Ganj Scheme, Kanpur in the year 1967. Unfortunately, her husband died in the year 1970. Following his death on 19. 10. 1976 the complainant got her name mutated and she repeatedly requested the authorities of Kanpur Development Authority to execute the sale deed in her favour. The Kanpur Development Authority issued a letter to her on 17. 3. 1993 and asked her to deposit Rs 2,700 as the balance amount of the plot's price along with interest at the rate of 21% per annum, lease rent of Rs. 360 and miscellaneous charges of Rs. 30, totalling to Rs. 17,680. She had deposited with the Authority the said sum with the requisite general stamp papers whereupon the sale deed had to be executed. The Kanpur Development Authority kept mum for nearly seven years and when the complainant moved an application on 8. 8. 2000 another letter of September 6, 2000 was issued to her by the Kanpur Development Authority whereby a demand of Rs. 1,51,313, besides the stamp papers, etc. was made. The complainant challenged the propriety of such demand and filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Kanpur Nagar.

In its written statement the Development Authority simply stated that the demand letter dated 6. 9. 2000 was justified. The District Consumer Forum, Kanpur Nagar having scrutinized the merits of the respective versions of the two parties, allowed the complaint of Smt. Krishna Devi Diwan and recorded its verdict to the effect that the demand contained in the Development Authority's letter dated March 17, 1993 was final. Accordingly, the Development Authority was under an obligation to execute the sale deed in favour of the complainant within 30 days from the date of judgment. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,000 was also awarded.

WE have scanned the merits of the case and we find that the judgment in appeal is supported by documentary evidence. It was, as mentioned above, a 34-year-old dispute when the complaint was filed in the year 2000 before the District Consumer Forum, Kanpur Nagar. Indeed, it is a very sorry state of affairs. The Development Authority does not act fairly while dealing with the allottees. In this case, the Kanpur Development Authority adopted a casual approach, not in a mood to resolve the issue and seemed out and out to harass the complainant. The present case is the worst example of harassment of an allottee, who has been suffering for as long as 41 years and just waiting for the sale deed to be executed in her favour. The Sujat Ganj scheme was launched way back in the year 1967. The complainant's husband could not bear the fruits of the allotment and he died a harassed lot. His wife also inherited harassment in legacy. She has been fighting for a cause for more than four decades. Still, the Kanpur Development Authority does not seem to be in a sympathetic mood. Alas! we can observe regrets over such a sordid state of affairs. The letter dated 17. 3. 1993 can clinch the entire issue and its bare perusal seems to reveal that the letter was issued containing final calculations. In other words it may be mentioned that whatever calculation has been made in the said letter is the final. The complainant/respondent did everything which she was required to do. Not only she deposited the entire sum of Rs. 17,680 asked for by the Development Authority but she also deposited the stamp papers as admitted by the Development Authority in its written statement. Her victimization seems to have reached its climax when she came to learn that the stamp papers deposited by her had been lost. We feel no hesitation in condemning this type of affairs by the Development Authority. Lapse of seven years after issuance of the final demand, during which period the stamp papers were misplaced, speaks volumes against the conduct of the officials/officers of the Kanpur Development Authority. Now fresh calculation amounting to Rs. 1,51,313 is absolutely unjustified, invalid and capricious. The Kanpur Development Authority owe an explanation not only for this additional demand but also as to why the complainant was kept on tenterhooks for nearly seven years after she deposited the stamp papers.

HAVING regard to what has been said above, we are of the decisive opinion that the judgment in appeal is perfectly valid and deserves to be confirmed. Accordingly, we hold that the appeal has no merit and deserves to be dismissed with costs. In the result the appeal fails and is dismissed. The Vice-Chairman of the Kanpur Development Authority shall personally ensure that the sale deed is executed within one month from the date a copy of this judgment is received by him. We make it clear that the Kanpur Development Authority having received the stamp papers from the complainant, is responsible to execute the sale deed at its own cost by purchasing the general stamp papers. In other words, the complainant/respondent shall not be forced to deposit the requisite general stamp papers again. Appeal dismissed.