Dawida Rehana (Hoshiarpur), November 2
In what should have been done under the Indira Aawas Yojna, a UK-based NRI group, Punjabi Wolves, is constructing as many as 20 pucca houses for the poor in two villages of Hoshiarpur district.

In an exemplary philanthropic work, Wolverhampton Wanderers Football Club’s supporter group Punjabi Wolves got inspiration to build houses for the poor from UK-based NRI philanthropist Surinder Singh Nijjer who had already made over 1,500 houses for the poor in various parts of Punjab.

The foundation stone for constructing 20 houses was laid at Dawida Rehana Kalan village by Nijjer in the presence of former Punjab minister Avtar Henry and former Punjab Youth Congress (PYC) general secretary Monty Sehgal on Wednesday.

While 14 houses will be constructed at Dawida Rehana Kalan, six will be built at Dawida Rehana Khurd village.

A member of the Punjabi Wolves group, Jatender Singh Heer, told The Tribune that they had raised over 1,15,000 pounds to make over 25,000 pounds available for this housing relief project.

Each house will consist of a room and a kitchen and the entire project will be completed in less than three months.

Interestingly, when asked, some of the beneficiaries, including Paramjit and Satpal of Dawida Rehana Khurd village, said they had not been contacted by any government official to construct their pucca houses under the Indira Awas Yojna or any other programme.

Meanwhile, sources said no survey for identifying BPL families had been made in Punjab since 2002 and the beneficiaries of the centrally sponsored Indira Awas Yojna were decided on the basis of the survey.

Dawida Rehana Kalan sarpanch Sita Devi thanked the NRI group for selecting her village for the construction of pucca houses for the poor.

Hoshiarpur, November 2
The District Consumer Court has ordered UTI Investor Services Limited, New Delhi, to make a payment of 1,500 units and 1,000 units, having a face value of Rs 10 per unit, along with 9 per cent interest per annum from the date of purchase of units till realisation to Sonali Mahajan (minor) of Deva Ji Colony, Mukerian. The company has been asked to pay litigation expenses of Rs 2,000 to the complainant within a month.

Sonali Mahajan filed a complaint on the ground that she purchased 1,500 units and 1,000 units through her grandmother and father, respectively, having face value of Rs 10 per unit under the Children’s Gift Growth Fund Unit Scheme, 1986 (Clause 8), of the Unit Trust of India through Anju Jain, a commission agent.

The maturity date of the units was October 5, 2018. The certificates dated March 14, 2000, were received by Sonali Mahajan, but she neither received any bond certificate nor redemption payment of the units.

The UTI took the plea that Sonali failed to produce the remittance proof of application money bearing cheques/drafts dated March 14, 2000, for Rs 15,000 and Rs 10,000 drawn on Punjab National Bank, Ludhiana, in favour of the UTI.

The units are issued subject to realisation of application money. The cheques/drafts were returned unpaid by the bank and Sonali was informed accordingly vide letter dated May 22, 2000, advising to return the original membership advice and acknowledgement receipt of the application form.

The UTI further raised the defence that the application money remained with the bank since March 14, 2000, and funds never came under the possession of the trust, therefore, the question of redemption amount under the scheme does not arise as the application money for the purchase of units was not paid.

The membership advice for 1,500 units and 1,000 units was issued to the Sonali Mahajan subject to realisation of the application money. The application money were not honoured by the bank. Due to non-realisation of the application money, the units were cancelled in records.

The consumer court, headed by President P.D. Goel, held that it was upon the UTI to prove that the cheques/drafts in question of 1,500 units for Rs 15,000 and 1,000 units for Rs 10,000 have not been realised.

To prove the said fact, the UTI has not produced any evidence, therefore, the only possible conclusion/presumption is that the said cheques/drafts for Rs 15,000 and Rs 10,000 have been realised by the UTI. More so, if the amount of Rs 15,000 and Rs 10,000 would have not been realised, then the UTI would have not issued the document for the purchase of 1,500 units and 1,000 units.