AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated 27.07.2010 of the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, "the State Commission") by which the State Commission set aside the order of the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Kurukshetra and dismissed the complaint of the petitioners by holding that the grievances of the petitioners/complainants against the respondents could not be termed "consumer dispute" under Consumer Protection Act, 1986 in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in U.T. Chandigarh Administration and Anr. Vs Amarjeet Singh and Ors. [(2009) 4 SCC page 660)].
LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has, however, drawn attention to the letter of allotment issued by the respondent in respect of the property put to auction for which the (highest) bid of the petitioners was accepted. In particular, he has referred to clause 6 of the letter of allotment which reads as under: "The possession of the site will be offered to you on completion of the development works in the area. In the case of building, the possession shall, however, be delivered within 90 days from the date of this letter. The possession of the site can be obtained by visiting this office personally or some authorised representative on any work day".
On this basis, he argues that there was a clear commitment on the part of the respondents to provide "service" by way of completion of development works in the area before offering possession of the plot/ site purchased by the petitioners in the open auction and hence, the judgment relied upon by the State Commission would not be applicable to the facts of this case.
The point raised by the learned counsel needs consideration.
ISSUE notice to the respondents, returnable on 20th October 2011.