Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

        It was averred that, the complainant in the years 2009 and 2010 visited the site, but did not find any  development there. Even basic amenities were not in existence. Requests made to   opposite parties no.1 and 2, to apprise with regard to development at the site and also delivery of possession of the unit, did not yield any result.  Ultimately, the representatives of opposite parties no.1 and 2 told the complainant that in the absence of some necessary approvals/clearances in respect of plot no.112, and also the land adjacent to it, being under some litigation, could not be acquired, as a result whereof the delivery of its possession is not at all possible.  Even, plot of similar size was not available with  opposite parties no.1 and 2, at the relevant time. Left with no alternative, the complainant sought refund of the deposited amount, but opposite parties no.1 and 2, flatly refused to do so.

        It was further stated that thereafter, opposite parties no.1 and 2, issued letters dated 25.08.2014 Annexure C-18 and 07.11.2014 Annexure C-20, in respect of plot nos.109-MLU-2-300 and 109-MLU-1-300, wherein an illegal demand of Rs.12,57,530/-  and Rs.7,53,242/-  respectively, was  made by opposite parties no.1 and 2, from the complainant. However, on receipt of the said letters, when the complainant visited the site to see the progress of development, he was surprised to see the same missing. Even basic amenities were not in existence there. The entries to the project were sealed by the Forest Department. On the other hand, despite above fact i.e. want of basic amenities such as roads, electricity, water, sewerage, storm water etc. etc., the complainant was asked to take possession of the units. Left with no alternative the complainant sent number of emails for the period from 11.11.2014, to 03.12.2015, in the matter, but no response was received.

"Hello Mr. Bajaj, We have blocked unit nos 1&2 in sector-109 for you as replacement option for plot no 112 AG SECTOR-109."

        However, the main grouse of the complainant is that, despite relocation to the said units, even then, actual physical possession thereof, was not offered to him, whereas, on the other hand, paper offer was made to him, vide letters dated 25.08.2014 and 07.11.2014, because when he visited the site after receiving the said letters, to see development and basic amenities, the same were found missing and besides  that, all entry points of the project, had been sealed by the Forest Department, as opposite parties no.1 and 2, failed to take requisite permissions/sanction from it. Thus, in these circumstances, the principal question, which goes to the root of the case, and falls for consideration, is, as to whether, offer of possession made by opposite parties no.1 and 2, to the complainant, vide letters dated 25.08.2014 and 07.11.2014, in respect of the relocated units, could be said to be genuine offer or not. It is well settled law that the onus to prove that the project had been completed and the area/site, in question, is fully developed is on the builder/opposite parties no.1 and 2. It was so said by the National Commission, in Emaar MGF Land Limited and another Vs. Krishan Chander Chandna, First Appeal No.873 of 2013 decided on 29.09.2014. It is very strange that not even an iota of evidence has been placed, on record, by opposite parties no.1 and 2, to prove that when offer was made to the complainant, in respect of the units, in question, development work was complete and that all the basic amenities were in existence. On the other hand, in case, all the development activities, had been undertaken, and completed at the site, by the said dates, then it was for opposite parties no.1 and 2, which could be said to be in possession of the best evidence, to produce cogent and convincing documentary evidence, in the shape of the reports and affidavits of the Engineers/Architects, as they could be said to be the best persons, to testify, as to whether, all these development activities, had been undertaken and completed at the site or not, but they failed to do so. Opposite parties no.1 and 2 were also required to produce on record, a copy of the Completion Certificate (if obtained), having been issued by the Competent Authority, which could be said to be best evidence, to prove their case, but they miserably failed to do so. It is well settled law that before offering/delivery of possession of unit, in a project, it is mandatory to obtain completion certificate, from the Competent Authority(s), failing which the purchaser is at liberty to say no, to such an offer.

                Secondly, the complainant has placed on record, copies of the RTI Information, relating to the said project, in question. Vide RTI Information dated 29.04.2014 Annexure C-31, it was clearly intimated by Greater Mohali Area Development Authority (GMADA), that opposite parties no.1 and 2, had not even applied to them for commission of sewerage treatment plant, water supply, electricity etc. Not only this, it is further evident from  RTI Information dated 26.02.2015 Annexure C-30, issued by the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL), that no regular electricity connection has been released in the sector, in question, wherein the plots are situated. The said RTI Information goes unrebutted by opposite parties no.1 and 2. Not even a single document has been brought on record to prove that the information relating to non-existence of basic amenities, mentioned in the said RTI Information is false, or that the said information was fabricated by the complainant. Had the said information been false or fabricated, opposite parties no.1 and 2, could have obtained certificate from the said Authorities, to say that the same had not been supplied from their Department, but they (opposite parties no.1 and 2) failed to do so. Thus, it could safely be said that the complainant has proved his case, that opposite parties no.1 and 2 did not even obtain permission to provide basic amenities such as water, electricity etc., till  29.04.2014 or 26.02.2015, the dates when RTI information aforesaid, was issued by the Authorities concerned.