Two years after the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission directed the Jalandhar Improvement Trust (JIT) to refund Rs 72.34 lakh along with 9 per cent annual interest from the dates of deposit, Rs 30,000 as compensation and Rs 21,000 towards litigation costs to Meenakshi Oberoi, an allottee of Surya Enclave Extension in Jalandhar, she continues to await full payment. The ordeal has been compounded by a dishonoured cheque issued by JIT during execution proceedings.
Cheque Bounces Due to Insufficient Funds
Reportedly, even a Rs 10 lakh cheque issued by JIT following execution proceedings was returned unpaid on 11 June, with the remark 'insufficient funds,' further adding to her financial distress. The cheque was part of partial payments made by the Trust after the complainant initiated execution proceedings in July 2024.
Background of the Dispute
The dispute pertains to a 356-square-yard residential plot in Surya Enclave Extension, originally allotted in 2012 to Gurdip Singh under a special category scheme. Later, Meenakshi Oberoi took over the allotment after paying the entire consideration amount, and the plot was formally transferred in her name in 2015.
According to the complainant, she deposited a total of Rs 70,82,880 with JIT to secure the plot. Despite this, she was neither handed over physical possession nor assured basic development at the site. She alleged that for years, the JIT scheme suffered from prolonged delays, inadequate infrastructure, and non-disclosure of legal issues related to land acquisition at the time of its launch. After waiting for over a decade, she approached the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in December 2022.
JIT's Defense and Commission's Ruling
JIT contested the allegations, maintaining that the dispute arose due to non-compliance with procedural requirements by the allottee within the prescribed timelines. It further argued that possession could only be handed over after completion of requisite formalities and fulfilment of conditions.
After hearing both sides, the Commission, in its order dated April 2, 2024, ruled in favour of the complainant. The Bench observed that buyers cannot be made to wait indefinitely for possession, particularly when basic development remains incomplete for years. It also noted that while allottees faced penalties for delayed payments, no corresponding liability was imposed on the authority for delays in delivering possession.
Execution Proceedings and Partial Payments
The Commission directed JIT to refund Rs 72,34,181 along with 9 per cent annual interest from the respective dates of deposit, besides compensation and litigation expenses. However, despite this order, when JIT failed to comply, the complainant initiated execution proceedings in July 2024.
During execution, JIT made partial payments, including Rs 8 lakh in January and Rs 10 lakh in March 2026. However, the recovery process suffered another setback when a Rs 10 lakh cheque issued by the Trust in May was dishonoured upon presentation and returned with the remark 'insufficient funds.' Reportedly, the complainant is still awaiting recovery of outstanding payment worth Rs 1.38 crore due to accumulated interests.
Wider Impact on Allottees
The Surya Enclave Extension project became mired in controversy due to prolonged delays, incomplete infrastructure, and litigation-related issues, leaving several allottees waiting for years for possession and basic amenities. The case highlights the systemic failures in public housing schemes and the challenges faced by buyers in enforcing consumer court orders against government bodies.
