Mobile View
Advanced Search Search Tips
View Complete document
Jodhpur Development Autho., ... vs State Consumer Disp. Red. Forum & ... on 11 October, 2011
Showing the contexts in which consumer judgments appears in the document
Change context size
Current

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur Jodhpur Development Autho., ... vs State Consumer Disp. Red. Forum & ... on 11 October, 2011 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11316/2010 & 11 other connected writ petitions ( See Schedule) Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum & Ors. Judgment dt: 11/10/2011 1/53 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR ORDER Jodhpur Development Authority, vs. State Consumer Disputes Jodhpur Redressal Forum & Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11316/2010 & 11 other connected writ petitions ( See Schedule) DATE OF JUDGMENT : 11th October, 2011 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI REPORTABLE Mr. M.C.Bhoot, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Surendra Singh, for the petitioner. Mr. Himanshu Maheshwari, for the respondents. BY THE COURT: 1. The petitioner, Jodhpur Development Authority, through its Commissioner, has approached this Court by way of present batch of writ petitions, inter alia, claiming the quashing of judgment and order dated 26/10/2009 passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Jodhpur on a complaint filed under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and further appellate order dated S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11316/2010

other connected writ petitions ( See Schedule) Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum & Ors. Judgment dt: 11/10/2011 2/53 6/1/2010 passed by the State Commission dismissing the appeal of petitioner, Jodhpur Development Authority and by way of interim relief, it is prayed that the Divisional Commissioner - Respondent no.3 may be restrained from executing the said judgment and order or otherwise taking any action against the JDA, Jodhpur in compliance thereof. FACTUAL MATRIX 2. The facts giving rise to these writ petitions by a public body, Jodhpur Development Authority ( `JDA' for short) which substituted the Urban Improvement Trust, Jodhpur ( `UIT' for short) under the Jodhpur Development Authority Act, 2009, are as under. 3. The land comprising of 46 khasras in khasra no. 771, 769 and 805/769 and khasra no. 751/43 in Jodhpur was set apart for residential purposes and placed under the disposal of UIT, Jodhpur in 1974. Certain persons disputed the said land to be government land and claimed that they purchased the land from khatedars and got the land converted under the relevant rules and obtained Pattas from the Land Conversion Officer, Jodhpur. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION

11316/2010 & 11 other connected writ petitions ( See Schedule) Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum & Ors. Judgment dt: 11/10/2011 3/53 4. Shorn of unnecessary details about litigations about these lands, the relevant facts would require mention of a resolution passed on 9/1/1997 (Ex.1) by UIT, Jodhpur and 17 members of the UIT headed by Mr.Damodar Bang as Chairman of the UIT, Jodhpur attended the said meeting and inter alia it was decided that out of aforesaid 46 khasras leaving aside khasra no. 751/43 for the residential colony Polo Link Society, for remaining khasra no. 771, 805/769, 809/771, 810/771, 811/771, 813/771 and 813/1/771 a map be prepared for developing this land and after leaving place for public garden, roads and after removal of encroachments, patta holders may surrender their respective title in favour of UIT & they would be reallotted the same as residential plots after realizing a sum of Rs. 560/- per sq. mtr. so that said residential colony of these lands may be developed to be named as `Samanvay Nagar' and `Shyam Nagar'. Broadly, it was decided that

Redressal Forum as well as State Consumer Disputes Redressal S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 11316/2010 & 11 other connected writ petitions ( See Schedule) Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur vs. State Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum & Ors. Judgment dt: 11/10/2011