Himachal Pradesh

Una

20/2012(Bls)

Parkash Chand Sharma - Complainant(s)

Versus

CEO Cum Secretary HIMUDA - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. R.S. Thakur

21 Jan 2015

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM UNA
DISTRICT UNA (HP).
 
Complaint Case No. 20/2012(Bls)
 
1. Parkash Chand Sharma
S/o Sh. Gorkhi Ram, Vill. Amarpur,Teh. Ghumarwin,Distt. Bilaspur(HP)-174001
...........Complainant(s)
Versus
1. CEO Cum Secretary HIMUDA
Nigam Vihar Shimla-2 (HP)
............Opp.Party(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. B.R. Chandel PRESIDENT
 
For the Complainant:
Complainant with counsel Sh.R.S.Thakur,Adv
 
For the Opp. Party: Sh. Sarpal Singh, Advocate
ORDER

O R D E R( Per Shri B.R. Chandel, President).

 

                   The undisputed facts of the present complaint are that the complainant Shri Parkash Chand Sharma applied for allotment of the residential plot belonging to HIMUDA in Mandhala (Baddi) District Solan, H.P., before the opposite party and the allotment  was made on the basis of draw of lots to the eligible applicants under various categories. The complainant has been allotted type-3 plot No.C-50 measuring 200 Sq.Mtrs. under self financing scheme vide letter dated 30-07-2007 Annexure C-1. The payment of the cost of the plot was required to be made by the complainant as per the terms and conditions mentioned  in letter Annexure C-1. He made the payment accordingly. As per clause-7 relating to cost  and mode of payment mentioned in allotment letter Annexure C-1 the difference between  the tentative cost and final cost was payable in lump sum  before handing over the possession  of the plot. The opposite party issued letter Annexure C-3 dated 29-09-2011 to the complainant  requiring him to make payment of full and final  cost amounting to Rupees  1,73,075/- within 45 days. The complainant was put to notice that possession of the plot would be given to him after payment  of the said amount and execution  of the conveyance deed and after fulfillment of other requirements made therein. The complainant deposited the said amount under protest vide letter Annexure C-2 and complied with other terms and conditions  on or about 16-01-2011. The possession of plot was given to the complainant within 45 days after compliance of the terms and conditions mentioned in Annexure C-3.

2.     In view of the above stated undisputed facts the complainant on the strength of this complaint has claimed that the opposite party be directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on deposit of Rupees 10,71,000/- as the opposite party has failed to hand over the possession of the plot  in question w.e.f. November 2010 till date as per condition No.XV of the prospectus/voucher ( offer for freehold residential plots annexed with allotment letter Annexure C-1 inspite of service of legal notice upon it which amounts to deficiency in service.

3.     The opposite party disputed the said claim and has set up the main defence firstly that this Forum has no territorial jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint  as neither the property in dispute is situated  nor the opposite party resides within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum and secondly, the opposite party did not commit any breach of the terms and conditions of the allotment hence committed no deficiency in service.

4.     The complainant moved the application  for allotment of plot  to the opposite party. The office of the opposite party is situated at Shimla. The allotment letter Annexure C-1 was issued by the opposite party from Shimla. The plot which has been allotted to the complainant is situated at Baddi  in District Solan. The possession of the plot was delivered to the complainant at Baddi in District Solan. The cost of the plot  was deposited  by the complainant with the opposite party at Shimla. Although, the complainant has stated that the office of the opposite party is also situated/functioning at Bilaspur town, but the said fact has not been proved nor it is proved that  in spite of allotment of plot in question the complainant was having any dealing with the allottee office  of opposite party at Bilaspur town. In view of the said fact, the complainant has not been able to prove that the cause of action either wholly or partly arose to file the present complaint within the territorial jurisdiction of this Forum.

5.     In view of the findings recorded above, this Forum is left with no alternative except to conclude that it has no jurisdiction to try and decide the present complaint and the present complaint deserves to be returned to the complainant for presentation in the appropriate Forum.

6.     In view of the findings recorded above, the complaint is ordered to be returned to the complainant along with documents after retaining certified copies thereof. Let certified copy of this order be sent to the parties free of cost, as per rules. The file, complete in all respects, be consigned to the Records.

 

 

 

ANNOUNCED & SIGNED IN  THE OPEN FORUM;

Today this the 21st day of  January, 2015.

 

 

                                                        ( B.R. Chandel)

President

 

 

 

                                                                                 (Manorma Chauhan)                     (Pawan Kumar) 

                                                                                           Member                                     Member    

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. B.R. Chandel]
PRESIDENT

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.