Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 152.
Instituted on : 11.04.2018.
Decided on : 09.07.2019.
Anita age 48 years, w/o Sh. Satender Kumar s/o Pyare Lal, R/o H.No.399/15, Ashok Nagar, Gohana Road, Rohtak.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
Estate Officer, HUDA, Rohtak.
……….Opposite party.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH.NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
SH. VED PAL, MEMBER.
DR. RENU CHAUDHARY, MEMBER.
Present: Sh.Naresh Kumar, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. Shakti Singh, Advocate for opposite party.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case are that complainant is owner in possession of a plot measuring 160 sq. yards situated at Rajendera Colony, Rothak. That in the year 2011 the said property of the complainant was acquired by the opposite party for the purpose of development of Sector-21, Bhiwani Road, Rothak. At the time of acquisition of land, it was assured by the opposite party that the complainant will be allotted a plot of size 60 sq. yards on deposit of Rs.50000/- by the complainant . Consequently, the complainant had deposited an amount of Rs.50000/- with the opposite party on dated 09.12.2011. That complainant continued to approach the opposite party for the allotment of plot and opposite party continued to assure that it will take some time. But after some time in the year 2017, opposite party refused to allot the plot as assured by them on the ground that the policy of the opposite party regarding allotment of plot for oustees has withdrawn and the amount deposited by the complainant will be refunded. But despite repeated requests and representation of the complainant, amount has not been refunded to the complainant till date. That the act of opposite party is illegal and there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite parties. As such, it is prayed that the opposite parties may kindly be directed to refund the amount of Rs.50000/- alongwith interest, compensation and litigation expenses to the complainant.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite party. Opposite party in its reply has submitted that the complainant had never approached the opposite party for refund of the amount till 05.12.2017 and on 15.12.2017 she moved an application for transfer of the amount deposited by her in her bank account no.9666210012610 operated in Syndicate bank Sunariaya Chowk, Rohtak and accordingly the opposite party had deposited an amount of Rs.63682/- in the account of the complainant by way of RTGS on 11.05.2018 which includes interest @ 5.5% p.a. as per rules of HUDA. Hence the present complaint is not maintainable and has become infructuous. It is prayed that complaint may kindly be dismissed with costs.
3. Ld. counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.C1 to Ex.C3 and has closed his evidence on dated 01.02.2019. Ld. counsel for the opposite party has tendered affidavit Ex.R1, documents Ex.R2 to Ex.R4 and has closed his evidence on dated 04.06.2019.
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 the complainant is that she had deposited an amount of Rs.50000/- on dated 09.12.2011 with the opposite party for allotment of plot but neither the plot was allotted nor the amount was refunded to the complainant despite her repeated requests. On the other hand, contention of ld. counsel for the opposite party is that the plot in question was not allotted by the opposite party due to the policy of Government and the amount of complainant was refunded by the opposite party on the application of complainant.
6. After going through the file and hearing the parties, it is observed that neither the plot was allotted by the opposite party nor the amount so deposited by the complainant on dated 09.12.2011 was refunded back by the opposite party till filing the present complaint. We have also perused the letter dated 11.08.2016 placed on record by the opposite party. As per condition no.15 of this letter, the earnest money was to be refunded alongwith interest @ 5.5% p.a. from the date of deposit till date of payment. The alleged letter was issued by the department on dated 12.08.2016 but the payment of the complainant was made on 11.05.2018, that too, after filing of present complaint. As such there is deficiency in service on the part of opposite party.
7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, complaint is allowed and it is directed that opposite party shall pay the interest @ 9% p.a. on the deposited amount from the date of deposit till its actual realization and after deducting the amount already paid by the opposite party, shall pay the remaining amount to the complainant and shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and litigation expenses to the complainant within one month from the date of decision.
8. 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:
09.07.2019.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
…………………………………
Ved Pal, Member.
………………………………..
Renu Chaudhary, Member.
