Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 572.
Instituted on : 20.11.2018.
Decided on : 19.08.2020
Anil Kumar son of Shri Jagat Singh, resident of House No.178/11, Hanuman Colony, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
Estate Officer, Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran Office at Rohtak, Sonepat Road, near Mahindra Model School, Rohtak.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
SMT.TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER
Present: Shri S.K. Hooda, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. R.K Sapra, Advocate for the opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant had purchased a plot bearing No.190-BP, Sector-4, Rohtak measuring 180 Sq. meter in open auction from respondent for a sum of Rs.48,60,000/- on 30.10.2016, and he had paid 10% amount as demanded by respondent on 01.11.2016. Thereafter, the respondent had told the complainant that the remaining amount will be deposited within 120 days from the date of auction and for that he will be issued an I.D. and password. The complainant had visited the office of respondent time and again but the respondent did not respond and he was unable to deposit the agreed amount in the absence of I.D. and password to be provided by respondent. He had received an allotment letter on 14.2.2017 which was issued on 3.2.2017 in which the terms and conditions of payment were mentioned. Thereafter, he contacted the respondent for I.D. & password to deposit the remaining amount but they assured that the same will be generated online. The complainant also sent a letter dated 25.2.2017 to get the account number and I.D. but despite his several visits, the respondent did not pay any heed. The schedule for payment was provided to the complainant on 27.2.2017 as the I.D. was generated late by the respondent. The complainant had approached many times to the respondent for schedule and other formalities regarding the payment but the respondent never respond to the complainant. After receiving the schedule, he had paid all the installments within time as demanded by respondent. He was never at default and had deposited the entire remaining amount within time. In the year 2018 when he checked his status regarding the above said plot, he came to know about the illegal penalty of Rs.1,37,006/- imposed upon him by the respondent. Thereafter, he contacted the respondent time and again to withdraw the above said penalty, but the respondent has not paid any heed towards the genuine request of complainant till today. The total outstanding amount as per statement is Rs.1,65,883/-. That the act of opposite party is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. As such, it is prayed that the opposite party may kindly be directed to cancel the illegal penalty of Rs.1,65,883/- and further penalty if any, and also to clear the account and issue NOC regarding the above said plot of complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in his reply has submitted that as per terms and conditions, the complainant shall have to deposit the amount within 120 days from the date of auction i.e. 31.10.2016. The complainant being the allottee was well aware about the terms and conditions and the schedule to deposit the requisite amount in accordance with the schedule provided in the notice of auction itself. The first installment was deposited on 27.3.2017 and the last payment was deposited on 3.5.2017. According to the terms and conditions of e-auction and HSVP Policy, the allottee is bound to pay the delay interest as shown in PPM system of HSVP. It is also submitted that the complainant could have deposited the amount by other means which is prescribed in the terms and conditions i.e. off line mode through National Bank by generating challan from PPM on the website of HSVP, to which he has failed to deposit the same. As per policy, 15% amount was due as on 14.12.2016 i.e. Rs.729000/- but allottee has paid his PAMON, 15% amount as on dated 27.3.2017 to 30.3.2017 Rs.729000/- but system has charged Rs.44848/- as delay interest on PAMON. As per policy, last date of depositing the payment of installment was 27.2.2017. But the allottee has paid his installment payment as on dated 23.4.2017 to 3.5.2017 Rs.3645000/- but system has charged Rs.90544/- as delay interest on installment. It is also submitted that the complainant has failed to place on record any acknowledgement of his letter dated 25.2.2017. It is also submitted that the complainant is liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,35,392/- as per the calculation as he has failed to deposit the amount within the prescribed period. There is no deficiency in service on the part of respondent. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied and opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint with cost.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C13 and has closed his evidence on dated 14.5.2019. Ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, and the evidence of OP was closed by Court order dated 17.9.2019.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through material aspects of the case very carefully.
5. In the present case, the grievance of complainant is that opposite party had imposed a penalty of Rs.165883/- upon the complainant on account of delayed payment of plot. It is contended that there was no delay on the part of complainant as the amount was to be deposited by the complainant after issuing the ID and password by the respondent. The complainant had received the allotment letter regarding the above said plot on 14.02.2017 in which terms and conditions of payment were mentioned and after that complainant sent a letter dated 25.02.2017 to get receive the account no. and I.D. but the same was issued in the month of March 2017. Thereafter the complainant made the payment. Hence the delay, if any, to deposit the amount is on the part of respondent. To prove this fact, complainant has placed on record copy of letter Ex.C4 dated 25.02.2017 and copy of allotment letter Ex.C3 dated 03.02.2017. As per the allotment letter Ex.C3, the remaining 75% amount was to be deposited within a period of 120 days from the date of auction without interest. In this regard it is observed that the date of auction was 31.10.2016, whereas the letter of allotment dated 03.02.2017 was sent to the complainant on 14.02.2017 i.e. after 103 days of auction. Hence there was delay on the part of respondent firstly at the time of sending the allotment letter to the complainant, secondly at the time of sending the account no. and I.D. which was issued in the month of March 2017. After receiving the ID and account no., complainant made the payment to the opposite party. As such, the delay, if any, was on the part of respondent. Hence the respondent is not entitled to charge any penalty from the complainant.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite party to cancel the illegal penalty of Rs.1,65883/- and further penalty or surcharge, if any, imposed upon the complainant on account of delayed payment. Opposite party is further directed to clear the account and issue NOC regarding the above said plot of complainant and also to pay Rs.10000/-(Rupees ten thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant. Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
7. Copy of this order be supplied to both the parties free of costs. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced in open court:
19.08.2020.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………
Tripti Pannu, Member.
………………………………..
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
