District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No.362/2020.
Date of Institution: 08.10.2020.
Date of Order: 12.12.2022.
Ganga Lal Rawat s/o late Shri Chimman Lal R//o village Piyala, Tehsil Ballabgarh, District Faridabad.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran, previously known as Haryana Urban Development Authority, Estate Office, Sector-12, Faridabad through its Estate Officer.
2. The Estate Officer, Haryana Shahari Vikas Pradhikaran, Sector-12, Faridabad.
…Opposite parties……
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. Vikram Pratap Singh, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Y.K.Sharma, counsel for opposite parties Nos.1 & 2.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant applied for allotment of plot in the office of opposite party under the scheme of reserve category of Advocates and the earnest money, was deposited to the tune of Rs.2,04,500/- with the opposite party alongwith the application of allotment by raising loan from State Bank of India. Upon draw of lot, the complainant herein was allotted the plot No. 3001-P, measuring 224.31 Sq. meters, situated in Urban Estate, Sector-56, 56A, Faridabad by the opposite party vide allotment letter memo NO. A-56-56A/48037 dated 06.12.2010. In compliance of the abovementioned allotment Letter dated 06.12.2010, the complainant deposited an amount of Rs. 3,99,029/- being 15% of total sum, through Bank Draft No. 683572 dated 27.12.2010 drawn on Punjab National Bank, favoring the respondent/opposite party no.2, in the office of respondents on 29.12.2010 against Receipt No. 422294 dated 29.12.2010. It is submitted that the complainant paid an amount of Rs. 6,03,529/- being 25%, within one month as stipulated in Allotment Letter. Threafter the complainant submitted an application dated 25.04.2011 with the opposite party No.2 with the request to give the possession of the plot in case all the amenities like water supply, street light, sewer and roads were provided which was part of development and also requested to the respondent no. 2, to intimate the complainant in the light of the letter mentioned above which was duly diaried at Single Window of the respondent /opposite party no. 1 as 6669 dated 25.04.2011. The complainant further moved an application dated 14.02.2012 which was duly diaried at Single Window vide Diary no. 825 to respondent for providing User Id and password of respondents for verification of status of said plot, but the respondent kept slept over the said application and gave no response to the complainant. In compliance of the above mentioned allotment letter dated 06.12.2010, the complainant deposited 1stDue Installment amounting to Rs. 5,19,036/- on 16.12.2011 along with possession offer interest i.e. (Principal amount of Rs. 3,01,764/- + Possession Offer Interest amount of Rs. 2,17,272/- = 5,19,036/-), through Bank Draft No. 141395 dated 15.12.2011 drawn on Punjab National Bank against Receipt No. 444783 dated 16.12.2011. As on the due date, an amount of Rs. 6,03,529/- + Rs. 5,19,036/- total amounting to Rs. 11,22,565/-was deposited by 16.12.2011. The complainant , being the allottee, visited his plot as to verify the actual developments made by the respondents, if any, but was surprised to note that there was no sign of any kind of development made by the respondents at the spot. To know the factual position of the development work, the complainant filed an application under RTI and respondent replied in RTI that “The work of electrification in adjoining of plot no. 3001, Sector-56-56A, Faridabad would be completed by June-12 vide Endorsement Memo No. 3719 dated 31.05.2012” means that Electrification Work/Development Work was not yet completed in the year 2012. Therefore, in absence of the basic amenities which were required to be provided to the allottees, the offer of possession as mentioned in para no. 26 of the allotment letter becomes redundant and thus can not be held to be applicable being frivolous. In these given facts, the respondents could not claim the interest alleging that the possession was offered vide allotment letter dated 06.12.2010. Thereafter the complainant moved an application to the opposite party on 25.06.2012 through Single Window Dairy No. 9200 for passing the fresh order Waiving Off the Possession Offer Interest till the possession was offered with complete development work and amenities, which is Condition Precedent for claiming the possession offer interest. The respondent informed to the complainant vide letter Memo No. 6951 dated 13.07.2012, which was in response to RTI application, that all the development works i.e. road, water supply and sewer line in front of plot no. 3001 stands completed. The respondents gave evasive reply mentioning that the development with regard to electricity and parks would be furnished by the concerned XEN’s of HUDA. In fact, there was no facility of electricity and the required amenities as required to construct the allotted plot. This was the reason that the Memo No. 6951 dated 13.07.2012 was silent about the required amenities. The complainant again submitted application under RTI for seeking information regarding development work in adjoining of the above said plot and in reply thereto, the respondent informed the complainant vide letter Memo No. 23639 dated 27.09.2012 that possession of the plot will be treated from the date of completion of electrification work and informed that the possession interest already paid would be adjusted in the second installment and second installment was due on 06.12.2012. The copy of which was also endorsed to Executive Engineer, HUDA, Electricity Division, Gurgaon with the request to complete the electrification work at the earliest possible so that the department may not sustain any loss of interest on installments. Keeping in view the said letter, the complainant deposited the 2nd installment of Rs.84,492/- on 05.12.212, after adjusting the possession offer interest amount of Rs.21,7,272/- which was deposited in Ist installment by the complainant (principal of Rs.3,01,764/- less of Rs.2,17,272/-= Rs. 84,492/- vide receipt No. 464963 dated 05.12.2012. Thus the total amount of Rs.12,07,057/- was deposited as on dated 05.12.2021. The complainant deposited 3rd Installment of Rs.3,01,764/- on 03.12.2013 through Demand Draft No. 338647 dated 03.12.2013 drawn on Punjab National Bank vide Receipt No. 485175 dated 03.12.2013. After deposit of the 3rdInstallment on 03.12.2013, the respondent issued Show Cause Notice dated 16.12.2013 mentioning that as per terms and conditions of allotment letter, you were required to remit Rs. 551502.51 up-to 10.12.2013. The respondents further mentioned that the if the stipulated amount was not paid within a period of 30 days from the date of issued of above said letter and in case of default penalty of Rs. 55,150/- was to be paid and also mentioned that in case no reply was received from the complainant within stipulated period, it would be presumed that the complainant has nothing to say in the matter. The complainant further deposited 4th due Installment of Rs.3,01,764/- on 15.12.2014 through Demand Draft No. 722058 dated 12.12.2014 drawn on Punjab National Bank vide Receipt No. 500317 dated 15.12.2014. The respondent issued second Show Cause Notice dated 30.01.2015 vide Memo No. 1993 which was nothing but the show cause notice exactly that of the earlier Show Cause Notice dated 16.12.2013 and the same was replied by the complainant vide Single Window Diary No. 2496 dated 23.02.2015. The complainant deposited 5th due Installment of Rs.3,01,764/- on 27.11.2015 through Demand Draft No. 722584 dated 24.11.2015 vide Receipt dated 27.11.2015. Thereafter respondent issued 3rdShow Cause Notice dated 26.05.2016, demanding of Rs. 10,60,465.85/- upto 26.05.2016 and it was also replied by the complainant vide Single Window Diary No. 10977 dated 22.06.2016. The complainant visited the office of respondent for clarifications and removal of ambiguity in calculations of the actual due amount, but all efforts goes in vain and proved to be futile exercise. Thereafter complainant deposited 6th due Installment of Rs.3,01,764/- on dated 25.11.2016 vide Challan Receipt No. 108775 dated 25.11.2016 of Punjab National Bank. The respondents issued a letter to complainant regarding payment of enhancement compensation amount of Rs. 7,75,699/- vide memo no. ZO001/EO001/UE001/DELET/0000001545/4236 dated 05.04.2018. The above said letter was dispatched on 06.04.2018 by the respondent vide speed post bearing no. EH713479916IN and was acknowledged by the complainant on 07.04.2018. The above mentioned letter was self contradictory as the above mentioned letter was dispatched on 06.04.2018, the payment schedule can not be made from 27/09/2017. The total amount paid by the complainant was Rs.31,89,812/- inclusive the enhanced amount of Rs.7,75,699/- as on 02.05.2018. It was further submitted that the respondent not only noted the wrong entry showing outstanding amount from the complainant, but also found that the respondents entered wrong dates of Instalments in their record, then complainant immediately submitted Application-cum-representation to the respondent no.2 vide letter diary No. 6469 on 15.06.2018 vide Single Window Service, Estate Office, Sector-12, Faridabad, and sent to Chief Administrator and the Estate Officer It is worth mentioning here that the above mentioned fact of mentioning wrong dates came to the knowledge of the complainant when the complainant took print of the Payment Schedule of Installments and the Current outstanding from the operative system of respondents, whereby the due dates were showing as 12.06.2011, 12.06.2012, 12.06.2013, 12.06.2014, 12.06.2015 and 12.06.2016, in place of 06.12.2011, 06.12.2012, 06.12.2013, 06.12.2014, 06.12.2015 and 06.12.2016.It was strange enough to see that under the Head of Payment Schedule and Current Outstanding of the Enhanced Amount the System Generated statement clearly shows that the respondents are not bothered even to see their own record as the interest amount is being levied with penalty, when the enhanced amount was deposited by the complainant well within one month of demand of the enhanced amount of Rs. 7,75,699/-. It was worth mentioning that the complainant paid the entire amount with the respondents as per Allotment Letter dated 06.12.2010 alongwith enhancement amount paid on 02.05.2018. Under a Special Scheme of OTS(One Time Settlement Scheme), the Hon’ble Chief Minister Haryana granted concession of 40% to its allottees, who are in default of payment, any lapses or enhancement payment, occurred on the part of the allottees/plot holders. In terms of the said scheme, the complainant was also entitled for the benefit of concession of 40% in PPM Account. The complainant sent a reminder dated 23.05.2019 to the respondent no. 2 under Speed Post and the copies thereof were sent to Chief Administrator, HUDA, Panchkula and the Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad. The complainant obtained the Plot Status Enquiry on 18th Dec. 2019, in which the respondents have shown the default payment of Rs. 17,77,212/-. On 03rd January 2020 the complainant obtained the Plot Status Enquiry, in which the respondents have shown the figure of pending payment of Rs.9,28,641/-, further this amount increased to Rs.9,95,846/- as on 05.10.2020. Therefore, the alleged amount of Rs.9,95,846/- showing pending as on 05.10.2020 was absolutely illegal and wrong and required to be removed/deleted from the account of the complainant. The aforesaid act of opposite parties amounts to deficiency of service and hence the complaint. The complainant has prayed for directions to the opposite parties to:
a) Over haul the account bearing plot NO. 3001-P, Sector-56-56A, Faridabad of the complainant by removing/deleting the illegal demand amount i.e. 9,95,846/- as on 05.10.2020 showing pending in the said account.
b) the opposite party till date had failed to offer possession of the said lot NO. 3001-P measuring-224.31 sq.mtrs. situated in urban estate Sector -56-56A, Faridabad after completion of development work in the area as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter dated 06.12.2010, therefore the opposite parties be directed to hand over the possession offer letter to the complainant in letter and spirit.
c) pay the interest on the possession offer interest already paid/deposited on 16.12.2011 by the complainant form the date of deposit i.e. to the 16.12.2011 to the date of deduction i.e. 05.12.2012 @ 15% p.,a. as per self contained terms and condition of allotment letter dated 06.12.2010.
d) pay the delayed possession interest on the deposited amount w.e.f 06.12.2013 till the date of offering possession to the complainant @ 9% p.a. as per terms and conditions of allotment letter dated 06.12.2010.
e) execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainant as pert terms and conditions of the allotment letter dated 06.12.2020.
f) refund the 40% concession granted by the state government of Haryana to the individual/person who paid the enhancement payment under OTS scheme on 02.05.2018 including the complainant.
g) pay Rs. 10,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
h) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the complainant was allotted plot No. 3001P, Sector-56, 56A to Sh. Ganga Lal Rawat S/o late shri Chimmani Lal RAwat vide office memo NO. 48037 dated 06.12.2010. as per the allotment letter condition No. 26, the possession of site was offered to be taken on any working Monday. Also as per the allotment letter conditions No.27, the installment scheme too was provided. Later on the request of the allottee on CM Window the offered possession was changed as 03.09.2012 and the same was updated in RPM System as 03.09.2012 in place of 06.12.2010. The development (civil) works of the above said plot NO.3001P, Sector-56, 56A, Faridabad was completed in the year 2010 vide Executive Engineer HSVP Div. NO.1 report. Also as per the Executive Engineer, HSVP Electrical Div. Report, the work in front of plot No. 3001P, Sector-56, 56A, Faridabad too was completed and energized on 03.09.2012. Opposite parties Nos.1 & 2 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
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 parties– Haryana Shehri Vikas Pradhikaran & Another with the prayer to: a) Over haul the account bearing plot NO. 3001-P, Sector-56-56A, Faridabad of the complainant by removing/deleting the illegal demand amount i.e. 9,95,846/- as on 05.10.2020 showing pending in the said account. b) the opposite party till date had failed to offer possession of the said lot NO. 3001-P measuring-224.31 sq.mtrs. situated in urban estate Sector -56-56A, Faridabad after completion of development work in the area as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter dated 06.12.2010, therefore the opposite parties be directed to hand over the possession offer letter to the complainant in letter and spirit. c) pay the interest on the possession offer interest already paid/deposited on 16.12.2011 by the complainant form the date of deposit i.e. to the 16.12.2011 to the date of deduction i.e. 05.12.2012 @ 15% p.,a. as per self contained terms and condition of allotment letter dated 06.12.2010. d) pay the delayed possession interest on the deposited amount w.e.f 06.12.2013 till the date of offering possession to the complainant @ 9% p.a. as per terms and conditions of allotment letter dated 06.12.2010. e)execute the conveyance deed in favour of the complainant as pert terms and conditions of the allotment letter dated 06.12.2020. f) refund the 40% concession granted by the state government of Haryana to the individual/person who paid the enhancement payment under OTS scheme on 02.05.2018 including the complainant. g)pay Rs. 10,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . h) pay Rs. 11,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/A – affidavit of Ganga Lal Rawat,, Ex.C-1 (OSR) – allotment letter, Ex.C-2 – receipt, Ex.C-3 (OSR) – letter dated 24.04.2011, Ex.C-4 (OSR) – letter dated 14.02.2012,, Ex.C5 (OSR – receipt, Ex.C-6 (OSR) - letter dated 31.5.2012, Ex.C-7 (OSR) – letter dated 25.06.2012,
Ex.C-8 (OSR) – letter dated13.07.2012, Ex.C-9 (OSR - letter dated 27.09.2012, Ex.C-10 (OSR) – receipt dated 05.12.2012, Ex.C-11 – receipt dated 07.12.2013, Ex.C-12 – show cause notice dated 16.12.2013,, Ex.C-13- reply to show cause notice, Ex.C-14 – receipt, Ex.C-15 – show cause notice dated 30.1.2015, Ex.C-16 – reply to show cause notice, Ex.C-17 – receipt dated 27.11.2015, Ex.C-18 – show cause notice dated 26.5.2016, Ex.C-19 – reply to show cause notice dated 22.6.2016, Ex.C-20 - challan No.. 108776 for Rs. 301764/-, Ex.C-21 - letter regarding payment of enhanced compensation for category residential (10 marla), plot No. 3001P, Sector 56,56A, Urban Estate Faridabad,, Ex.C-22 – not readable, Ex.C-23 – track consignment, Ex.C-24 – challan No.324126 for Rs. 775699/-, Ex.C25 – letter dated 15.06.2018, Ex.C-26 – letter dated 15.06.2018,, Ex.C-27 & 28 – postal receipts, Ex.C-29 (colly) – Allottee account information, Ex.C-31 – letter dated 23.05.2109,, Ex.32 to 34 – postal receipts, Ex.C-35 –letter 15.06.2019,, Ex.C-36 – postal receipt, Ex.C-37 – letter dated 24.07.2019 regarding appeal under right to information Act, 2005, Ex.C-38(OSR) - letter dated 02.07.2019 to CM Window, Ex.C-39 (colly) CM Grievances Readressal System, Ex.C-4 0– letter dated 13.1.2020, Ex.C-41 – letter dated 09.07.2019 regarding supply of information under RTI Act,, Ex.C-52 – letter dated 03.07.2018 written by the B.B.Taneja Superintendent, Chief Administrator, HSVP to The administrator, HSVP, Faridabad, Ex.C-43 – letter dated 20.06.2019, Ex.C-44 – RTI letter dated 18.07.2019, Ex.C-45 – note dated 19.06.2018, Ex.C-46 – letter dated 26.06.2018,, Ex.C-47 & 48– plot status enquiry, Ex.C-49 - Allottee Account Information, Ex.C-50 – letter dated 18.2.2020,
On the other hand counsel for the opposite parties strongly agitated
and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite parties, Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shri Amit Kumar, Estate Officer, HUDA, Sector-12, Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – allotment letter.
6. In this complaint, the possession offer date was corrected as to be 03.09.2012 in place of the earlier possession offer date 06.12.2010. The above mentioned correction was carried out on 17.01.2020. Since the correction in their PPM System was carried out on 17.01.2020, after making the complaint by the complainant at CM window on 02.07.2019, this fact is clear in the Status Query Form, Ex.C-39 (Colly) running into 9 pages. Thus, the possession offer date cannot be taken to be prior to 17.01.2020 and that too can be taken in case the respondents sent offer possession letter to the complainant in writing. Moreover, the respondents have sent a letter dated 13.01.2020 vide Memo No. 226, mentioning therein that the respondents have made corrections in their record taking the date of offer of possession as 03.09.2012 in place of 06.12.2010. Right from 03.09.2012 to 17.01.2020 the correction of the offer of possession has never been intimated to the complainant in writing. The opposite parties submitted the reply to the complaint of the complainant agreeing to the stand taken by the complainant. Accordingly thereafter, the required evidence was adduced by the respective parties taking the same stand, as were taken in the complaint and written statement. Opposite parties failed to rebut the stand of the complainant with documentary Evidence. The opposite parties only mentioned that the date of offer of possession was changed from 06.12.2010 to 03.09.2012 upon filling of an application at CM Window by the complainant. The opposite parties failed to produce the alleged letter of the changed date of offer of possession letter. The opposite parties are taking the changed date of possession letter as Ex. C-40. From the perusal of Ex. C-40, this Hon’ble Commission would gather that there is not a single whisper, which could say Ex. C-40 was the letter of possession with changed date. As per the documents vide Ex. C-40, Ex. C-45, Ex.C-46, Ex. C-47 and Ex. C-48, sent to the complainant by the opposite parties would conclude that on the dates given in Ex. C-45, Ex. C-46, Ex. C47 and Ex. C-48, the opposite parties were not even aware as on which dates the development works were completed or not. Apart from the above submissions that despite the receipt of the letter dated 18.02.2020, by the opposite parties vide their Diary Receipt No. 1127 dated 18.02.2020 at Single Window of HSVP, Faridabad, the opposite parties failed to respond till date. The act and conduct of the opposite parties speaks at its volume. As per Ex. C-40, the opposite parties are claiming Rs. 9,28,160/- as on 13.01.2020, whereas at the time of filling the present complaint, the claim of the respondent was Rs. 9,95,846/- as on 05.10.2020, whereas now the claim of the opposite parties towards outstanding amount of Rs.1150228/- as on 31.01.2022 which is wrong and baseless.
7. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed.
8. Opposite parties are directed to:
a) over haul the account of the complainant ,adjust the excessive amount and refund the excessive amount to the complainant (as per his prayer clause from a to i) as per T&C of the HUDA.
b) pay Rs.2200/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment.
c) pay Rs.2200/- as litigation expenses to the complainant. Compliance of this order be made within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of order. Copy of this order be given to the parties concerned free of costs and file be consigned to record room.
Announced on: 12.12.2022 (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.
