District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 266/2022.
Date of Institution:17.05.2022.
Date of Order:18.04.2023.
Jatinder Paul Sarwal, aged about 67 years son of late Shri Mela Ram Sawal, Resident of House No. 706, Sector-46, Faridabad, District Faridabad Aadhar card No. 904407770928 mobile: 9891481496.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
Haryana Sahari Vikas Pradhikaran (Formerly known as Haryana Urban Development Authority), Sector-12, Faridabad, District Faridabad through its Estate officer.
…Opposite party
Complaint under section-12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Now amended Section 34 of Consumer protection Act 2019.
BEFORE: Amit Arora……………..President
Mukesh Sharma…………Member.
Indira Bhadana………….Member.
PRESENT: Sh. J.P.Adhana , counsel for the complainant.
Shri Y.K.Sharma counsel for opposite party. (defence struck off vide order dated 07.12.2022).
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that one Rahim Ilahi son of Yusuf Ilahi, resident of B-272, grater Kailash-1, New Delhi was allotted residential plot bearing No. 741, Sector-46, Faridabad, having an area of 90 sq. Meters by the opposite party vide allotment letter bearing its Memo NO. A/467/90/2222 dated 10.05.1990. Later on on the basis of said allotment letter, sai Rahim Ilahi applied with the opposite party to get transferred the above said plot to the name of Jai Inder Paul Sawal i.e. complainant and for which he completed all requisite formalities with the opposite party and thereafter, the opposite party granted permission to transfer the said plot to the name of the complainant vide permission letter bearing Ref. No. 1876 Sector-16 dated 20.03.1993, subject to payment of requisite amounts with them. The opposite party issued re-allotment letter bearing Endst. No. 1956 dated 29.4.1993 to the name of the complainant. Inspite of re-allotment of the above said plot, the opposite party failed to deliver the possession thereof to the complainant. Instead, it was the opposite party, who issued letter bearing memo No. 386 dated 21.4.2000 to the name of the complainant, stating therein “plot o.. 741, Sector-46, Faridabad was allotted to him vide this office memo No.2222 dated 10.5.1990 & due to some unavoidable circumstances/litigations, at the site, the possession could not be delivered to him. Now in draw of lots held on 12.08.1998, he was exchanged alternative plot No. 853, Sector-45, in lieu of disputed plot No. 741, Sector-46, Faridabad. The terms and conditions of the allotment letter issued to him vide this office memo No. 2222 dated 10.05.1990 would remain unchanged. He would have to deposit balance amount against this plot, as per HUDA policy. He could take possession of this plot on any
working day. The complainant became ready to take possession of the said alternative plot No. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad, for which the complainant deposited the balance amount with the opposite party in respect of above said alternative plot on 29.06.2016. After that the complainant asked several times to the opposite party, verbal as well as in writing to issue N.O.C/No Dues Certificate in respect of above said allotted plot to the name of the complainant, with a request to get register the conveyance deed qua the said plot to the name of complainant, but always the opposite party avoided it on one pretext or the other. Even the complainant wrote several letters to the opposite party and requested them to issue NOC and to get execute the conveyance deed in respect of allotted plot to the name of the complainant, but it was the opposite party who did not pay any heed towards legitimate request of the complainant. The aforesaid act of opposite party amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite party to:
a) get execute and register the conveyance deed in the name of complainant in respect of allotted plot bearing No. 853, Sector-45, Urban Estate, Faridabad.
b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Upon receipt of the complaint notices were sent to opposite party. Opposite party put in appearance through counsel. Despite availing several opportunities written statement had been filed on behalf of opposite party.
Therefore, defence of opposite parties was struck off vide order dated 07.12.2022
3. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
5. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite party–Haryana Sahari Vikas Pradikaran with the prayer to: a) get execute and register the conveyance deed in the name of complainant in respect of allotted plot bearing No. 853, Sector-45, Urban Estate, Faridabad. b) pay Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . c) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.C1/A –affidavit of Jatinder Paul Sawal, Annexure C – allotment letter vide memo No. A/46/90/2222 dated 10.05.90, Annx.C – Memo No. 1876, Annx.C-2 –Possession certificate, Annx.C-3 – Memo dated 20.4.93 regarding re-allotment of plot No. 0741, Sector-046, Faridabad, Annx.C-4 - letter dated 21.4.2000 regarding exchange of alternative plot No. 853, Sector-45, in lieu of disputed plot No. 741, Sector-46, Faridabad. Annx.C-5 - letter dated 3.10.2003, Annx.C-6 – letter dated 21.01.2005, Annx.C7 to C10 – letters regarding exchange of alternate plot NO. 853, Sector-45, in lieu of plot No. 741, Sector-46, Faridabad, Annx.C11 to 25 – letters regarding issue of NOC of plot No. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad, Annx.C-26 letter dated 5.5.2021 regarding non issue of No Dues Certificate as well as non-execution of conveyance deed of
plot No. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad, Annx. C-27 & 28 letters regarding non issue of No Dues Certificate as well as Non-Execution of conveyance deed of plot No. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad, Annx.C-29 - letter regarding execute the conveyance deed in respect of plot No. 853, sector-45, Faridabad, Annx.C-30 – Affidavit-Cum-Undertaking, Annx.c-31 – CM Window Action taken report (ATR) – final reply, AnnxC-32 – CM Window Action taken report (ATR) – Final reply, Annx.C-33 –to 36 – letters, Annx.C-37 to 43 – letters regarding exchange of alternative plot NO. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad in lieu of plot No. 741, sector-46, Faridabad, Annx.C-44 to C-46 – letters regarding under protest payment of enhanced compensation in respect of House/Plot No. 853, Sector-45, Faridabad, Annx.C-48 to C-50 – letters, Annx.C-51 – receipt, Annx.C-52 – letter, Annx.C-53 – letter dated 4.6.2020, Annx.C-54 – letter dated 17.01.2020 regarding payment of dues in r/o 853, Sector-45.
6. There is nothing on record to disbelieve and discredit the aforesaid evidence of complainant. Since opposite party had not filed written statement to contest claim of the complainant despite availing several opportunities, therefore, defence of opposite parties was struck off vide order dated 07.12.2022. Hence the allegations made in complaint by the complainant go unrebutted. From the aforesaid evidence it is amply proved that opposite party has rendered deficient services to the complainant. Hence, the complaint is allowed.
7. Opposite party is directed to :
a) get execute and register the conveyance deed in the name of complainant in respect of allotted plot bearing No. 853, Sector-45, Urban Estate, Faridabad.
b) pay Rs.2200/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment.
c) pay Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses.
Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Copy of this order be sent to the parties concerned free of costs. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced on: 18.04.2023 (Amit Arora)
President
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Mukesh Sharma)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
(Indira Bhadana)
Member
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Faridabad.
