Subscribe To Print Edition About The Tribune Code Of Ethics Download App Advertise with us Classifieds
search-icon-img
  • ftr-facebook
  • ftr-instagram
  • ftr-instagram
search-icon-img
Advertisement

Give possession of flat or return money, consumer panel tells JIT

Jalandhar, July 30 The Jalandhar Improvement Trust (JIT) faces the consequences of failing to deliver possession of a flat to an allottee at the Bibi Bhani Complex. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ruled in favour of the...
  • fb
  • twitter
  • whatsapp
  • whatsapp
Advertisement

Jalandhar, July 30

The Jalandhar Improvement Trust (JIT) faces the consequences of failing to deliver possession of a flat to an allottee at the Bibi Bhani Complex.

Advertisement

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has ruled in favour of the complainant, Harnek Singh Saggu, stating that the JIT must provide possession within three months or reimburse the allottee’s money along with 9 per cent interest and pay Rs 35,000 as compensation and litigation expenses, totalling nearly Rs 12 lakh.

Harnek Singh Saggu shared his grievances about the LIG flat he was allotted in the 51.5 acre Bibi Bhani Complex Scheme way back in 2009. Assured of two-storey apartments with top-notch amenities and timely possession in 2012, he paid Rs 5.87 lakh within the specified terms, completing the final installment in 2012.

Advertisement

Despite multiple visits to the JIT authorities requesting completion of work and possession handover, he received no satisfactory response.

He levelled allegations against the JIT, claiming that the Trust coerced allottees into taking possession in 2017 through fake notifications and possession letters. He accused the JIT of perpetrating a major fraud against innocent residents, who had paid lakhs for the residential scheme but remained without possession for over a decade.

Moreover, Saggu pointed out that the Bibi Bhani Complex had become a hub of anti-social activities, with poor-quality vacant flats illegally occupied by miscreants. The promised facilities such as street lights, electricity connections and roads were glaringly absent, adding to the woes of the residents.

In response to the complaint, the JIT’s counsel argued that the claim for monetary compensation was not admissible as the complaint was filed after a four-year lapse, considering it time-barred. However, the president of the commission, after examining the presented facts from both parties, ruled in favour of complainant Harnek Singh Saggu.

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
tlbr_img1 Home tlbr_img2 Opinion tlbr_img3 Classifieds tlbr_img4 Videos tlbr_img5 E-Paper