9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 1009X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Area Committee, Union Territory of Chandigarh, on free-hold basis in the Motor Market and Commercial Complex at Manimajra, by the appellant. 4. Para 8(a) of the said allotment order stated that the allottee should complete the building in accordance with the sanctioned plan which shall be according to the control sheets prepared by the Chief Architect and Secretary of the Board. Thereafter, the Administrator issued a letter on 9-7-93 to the respondent's husband that the procedure relating to preparation of Architectural Control Sheets for Shop-Flats are applicable for Motor Shops also and that in these cases the said procedure of Architectural Control permits the construction of shops on the ground floor and flats on the first and se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med under Section 74 of the Haryana Housing Board Act, 1971, as extended to the Union Territory of Chandigarh. The relevant Regulation reads as follows: Eligibility of Allotment: (1) A dwelling unit or flat in the Housing Estates of the Board shall be allotted only to such person who or his wife/her husband or any of his/her dependent relations including unmarried children does not own on free-hold or lease-hold or on hire-purchase basis, a residential plot or house in the Union Territory of Chandigarh or in any of the Urban Estates of Mohali or Panchkula. Similarly persons who have acquired a house/residential site anywhere in India through Govt./Semi-Govt./Municipal Committee/Corporation/Improvement Trust AT CONCESSIONAL RATE in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al before the State Consumer disputes Redressal Commission, Union Territory at Chandigarh, in Appeal Case No. 106/97, which by its order dated 11-11-1997, confirmed the order of the District Forum. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred a Revision before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi. As already stated, the National Commission dismissed the Revision by its order dated 29-4-1999. 10. In this appeal, it is contended by Mr. B. Datta, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Chandigarh Housing Board that all the Tribunals below had gone wrong in their interpretation of Regulation 6(1) referred to above. Learned Senior Counsel contended that it was an undisputed fact that on the commerci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r commercial plot, it must necessarily be held that the husband of the respondent owned a residential house within the territory in question and that therefore the respondent (wife of the first allottee) is not eligible for allotment of another residential plot from the said authority. It must be realised that these plots are allotted on concessional basis to the allottees by the public authority and the relevant Regulations must therefore be interpreted in such a manner to save their real purpose so that the plots are available, as far as possible, to the largest number of persons, and for preventing the same family members husband or wife or dependents, as the case may be, from getting more than one plot or house, for the same purpose. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
