View 2959 Cases Against Haryana
Neelam Rani filed a consumer case on 05 Sep 2022 against Haryana Shahari Vikas Pradhikaran in the Karnal Consumer Court. The case no is CC/589/2021 and the judgment uploaded on 06 Sep 2022.
BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, KARNAL.
Complaint No.589 of 2021
Date of instt. 21.10.2021
Date of decision 05.09.2022
Neelam Rani aged 56 years widow of Shri Surinder Kumar son of Shri Megh Raj resident of house no.1935-P, Sector-9, Urban Estate, Karnal.
…….Complainant
Versus
Haryana Shahari Vikas Pradhikaran through Estate Officer, Sector 12 Urban Estate, Karnal.
…..Opposite Party.
Complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
Before Sh. Jaswant Singh……President.
Sh.Vineet Kaushik ………..Member
Dr. Rekha Chaudhary…..Member
Present: Shri Surinder Malhotra, counsel for complainant.
Shri Amit Munjal, counsel for the opposite party.
(defence struck off, vide order dated 26.08.2022).
(Jaswant Singh President)
ORDER:
The complainant has filed the present complaint Under Section 35 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’) on the averments that late Shri Surinder Kumar husband of complainant purchase house no.1935-P, Sector-9 Urban Estate, Karnal, on a plot measuring 60 meters (71.72 sq. yards) for valuable consideration, vide registered sale deed dated 14.05.2019. The re-allotment letter dated 21.05.2019 was issued by the OP, in the name of husband of complainant, who purchased the house in question from Mukesh Kumar. Shri Surinder Kumar died on 13.05.2021 and complainant has succeeded to the House in question, vide registered Will dated 29.07.2019 executed by late Shri Surinder Kumar. On the basis of the Will, complainant applied to the OP for transfer of the house in question in her name and an appointment dated 04.08.2021 was given to complainant to come present in the office of the OP for the needful. Accordingly, complainant appeared in the office of OP on 04.08.2021 and OP assured the complainant for transfer of the house in her name would be done in due course but till date, despite various personal visits the OP has failed to transfer the house in question in her name. When complainant enquired the matter, the OP is avoiding to give any reason in writing as to why the transfer application is not being allowed. In this way there is deficiency in service on the part of the OP. Hence this complaint.
2. On notice, Shri Amit Munjal Advocate on behalf of OP appeared but did not file the written version after availing several opportunities including two last opportunities and cost was also imposed for filing the same. Hence, the defence of the OP was struck off on 07.06.2022.
3. Learned counsel for complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of complainant Ex.CW1/A, sale deed dated 14.05.2019 Ex.C1, copy of re-allotment letter Ex.C2, copy of death certificate Ex.C3, copy of Will of Surinder Kumar Ex.C4, copy of appointment slip Ex.C5, copy of Aadhar card of complainant Ex.C6 and closed the evidence on 26.08.2022 by suffering separate statement.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.
5. Learned counsel for the complainant, while reiterating the contents of complaint, has vehemently argued that the husband of complainant namely Surinder Kumar had purchased a house vide registered sale deed dated 14.05.2019. Shri Surinder Kumar died on 13.05.2021 and complainant has succeeded to the House in question, vide registered Will dated 29.07.2019 executed by late Shri Surinder Kumar. On the basis of the Will, complainant applied to the OP for transfer of the house in question in her name but OP failed to transfer the same in her name despite various personal visits and request and lastly prayed for allowing the complaint.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for OP denied all the facts mentioned in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
7. The case of the complainant is that she has applied to the OP for transfer of the house in question in her name but OP failed to do so. To prove her case complainant placed on record her affidavit Ex.CW1/A, sale deed dated 14.05.2019 Ex.C1, copy of re-allotment letter Ex.C2, copy of death certificate Ex.C3, copy of Will dated 29.07.2019 of her husband late Shri Surinder Kumar Ex.C4, copy of appointment slip Ex.C5. It is evident from the appointment slip the application no.ZO004/EO016/UE026/2021/WCUIP/ 000019 has been pending with the OP since 04.08.2021, but no action has been taken by the OP.
8. On the other hand, to rebut the version of the complainant, OP neither filed written version nor produced any evidence. Therefore, the evidence produced by the complainant goes unchallenged and unrebutted and there is no reason to disbelieve the same. Hence, the act of OP for not deciding the abovesaid application amounts to deficiency in service.
9. In view of the above discussion, we dispose of the present complaint with the direction to OP to decide the application no.ZO004/EO016/UE026/2021/WCUIP/000019 mentioned in appointment slip Ex.C5 dated 04.08.2021 for transferring the house in question on the basis of Will, as per law, within 45 days from the receipt of copy of this order. The parties concerned be communicated of the order accordingly and the file be consigned to the record room after due compliance.
Announced
Dated:05.09.2022
President,
District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Karnal.
(Vineet Kaushik) (Dr. Rekha Chaudhary)
Member Member
Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes
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.