Haryana

Sonipat

183/2014

Subhash Thakkar s/o Hari Krishan - Complainant(s)

Versus

Haryana Urban Development Authority - Opp.Party(s)

R.D. Sharma

15 Dec 2014

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,

SONEPAT.

             

 

                             Complaint No.183 of 2014

                             Instituted on:28.7.2014

                             Date of order:16.04.2015

 

Subhash Thakkar son of Hari Kishan Thakkar, resident of H.No.787, Sector 14, Sonepat.

                                            ...Complainant.

 

                      Versus

 

HUDA Sector 15, Sonepat through its Estate Officer.

                                                                                                           ...Respondent.

 

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 12 OF        

THE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986

 

Argued by:Sh. RD Sharma Adv. for complainant.

          Sh. Jaideep Kaushik, Adv. for respondent.                  

 

 

BEFORE    NAGENDER SINGH, PRESIDENT.

          PRABHA WATI, MEMBER.

          D.V. RATHI, MEMBER.

 

O R D E R

 

          Complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondent alleging therein that he is owner in possession of the house no.787 Sector 14, Sonepat and he has purchased this plot vide registered sale deed no.3865 dated 10.12.1984. After completion of the construction, the complainant moved an application to the respondent for issuing completion certificate but of no use.  The respondent had written a letter to XEN HUDA vide letter no.23805 dated 21.11.2002 for issuing no objection certificate, but of no use and this wrongful act of the respondent has caused unnecessary mental agony and harassment to the complainant. So, he has come to this Forum and has filed the present complaint.

2.        In reply, the respondent has submitted that the complainant was asked by the respondent to submit the required documents from the Regd. Architect vide memo no.2085 dated 21.2.2003 & 2700 dated 21.5.2014, but despite this, the complainant has not submitted the required documents/forms/certificates through registered architect with the respondent. So, it cannot be said that there is any kind of deficiency in service on the part of the respondent and thus, prayed for the dismissal of the present complaint.

3.        We have heard the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for both the parties at length and we have also gone through the entire relevant material available on the case file carefully & minutely.

4.        The complainant by way of present complaint has sought the relief to direct the respondent to issue the completion certificate in favour of the complainant regarding the house in question.

          On the other hand, the respondent’s stand is that the complainant was asked by the respondent to submit the required documents from the Regd. Architect vide memo no.2085 dated 21.2.2003 & 2700 dated 21.5.2014, but despite this, the complainant has not submitted the required documents/forms/certificates through registered architect with the respondent.

          In our view, the ends of justice would be fully met if some directions are issued to both the parties.  Accordingly, we hereby direct the complainant to complete the formalities of the respondent and also to submit the required documents with the respondent.  Similarly, it is directed to the respondent that if the complainant complete the formalities and submit the required documents with the respondent, in that event, to issue him the completion certificate regarding the house in question.

 

          With these observations, findings and directions, the present complaint stands disposed off.

          Certified copy of this order be provided to both the parties free of cost.

File be consigned to the record-room.

 

 

(Prabha Wati)        (DV Rathi)                 (Nagender Singh-President)

Member DCDRF        Member DCDRF                   DCDRF, Sonepat.

 

Announced:16.04.2015