Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 461
Instituted on : 16.10.2020
Decided on : 09.03.2023
Suman Kumari Sangwan W/o Sh. Sudhir Sangwan R/o VPO Nuran Khera, Tehsil Gohana, District Sonepat, Haryana.
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- Haryana Urban Development Authority through its Chief Administrator, Panchkula, Sector-6, Panchkula.
- Administrator HUDA, Rohtak, Sector-3, Rohtak.
- Estate Officer HUDA, Rohtak Sector-3, Rohtak.
……….Opposite parties.
COMPLAINT U/S 12 OF CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT,1986.
BEFORE: SH. NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT.
DR. TRIPTI PANNU, MEMBER.
DR. VIJENDER SINGH, MEMBER.
Present: Sh. Rishi.P.Deswal, Advocate for the complainant.
Sh. M.K.Munjal, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that a plot No.319 measuring 8 Marla, Sector-6, Rohtak was allotted to the complainant by the opposite parties vide office memo no.4754 dated 21.05.2012 on certain terms and conditions mentioned in the allotment letter. As per the condition No. 7 it has been mentioned that “the possession of the plot will be offered within a period of 3 years from the date of allotment after completion of development work in the area. In case possession of the plot is not offered within the prescribed period of 3 years from the date of allotment, HUDA will pay interest @ 9% (or as may be fixed by Authority from time to time) on the amount deposited by you after the expiry of 3 years till the date of offer of possession and you will not be required to pay the further installments. The payment of the balance installments will only start after the possession of the plot is offered to you”. It is further submitted that the opposite party no. 3 could not provide the area of the above plot in question since the area around the plot in question is under dispute and under litigation. No water supply, sewerage system, road and electricity facility have been provided to the plot in question till date. Thereafter complainant made request to allot an alternate plot in lieu of her original plot, to pay 9% interest on the deposited amount, not to charge any interest or penalty from the complainant till the offer of possession of fully developed alternate plot in lieu of her original plot and to refund the interest already charged on amount of wrong offer of possession & refund the amount of enhancement etc. But the respondents refused to accept the request of complainant. As such as per condition 7 of the allotment letter, complainant is not required to pay the further installments. The act of opposite parties is illegal and amounts to deficiency in service. Hence this complaint and it is prayed that opposite parties may kindly be directed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- on account of harassment, to pay interest @ 24% per annum on the deposited amount from the date of deposit till the offer of possession of fully developed alternate plot, already charged interest on account of offer of possession and not to charge interest on the balance amount till the date of allotment of alternate plot.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that in fact the plot in question is under litigation in CWP No. 7064 of 2008 pending in the Hon’ble High Court, Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh and as such the possession of the plot in question could not be given to the complainant. It is wrong and denied that the complainant made request to allot an alternate plot in lieu of her original plot, to pay 9% interest on the deposited amount and not to charge any interest or penalty from the complainant till the offer of possession. It is further submitted that complainant is not entitled for any amount of refund since the property in question is already the subject matter of CWP No. 7064 of 2008 pending in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. All the other contents of the complaint were stated to be wrong and denied.
3. Ld. Counsel for the complainant in his evidence has tendered affidavit Ex.CW1/A, documents Ex.CW1/B to Ex.CW1/F and has closed his evidence on dated 23.11.2021. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex. R-1 to Ex. R-9 and has closed his evidence on dated 07.07.2022.
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 the plot in question was allotted to the complainant vide letter dated 21.05.2012 and offer of possession was to be made upto 21.05.2015. The complainant has submitted detail of deposit of amount with the respondent in her affidavit tendered as Ex.CW1/A in her evidence on dated 23.11.2021, which is as follows:
(i) Rs.155700/- dated 08.05.2021(date is wrongly mentioned and as per
account statement Ex.CW1/F the same is
08.05.2012)
(ii) Rs.235000/- dated 19.06.2012
(iii) Rs.200250/- dated 17.07.2013
(iv) Rs.200000/- dated 10.04.2015
(v) Rs.281069/- dated 15.11.2018
(vi) Rs.46845/- dated 15.11.2018
(vii) Rs.423851/- dated 28.11.2018
The total deposited amount comes to Rs.1542695/-
As per complainant, the area of plot in question is under litigation and as such the possession of the plot cannot be given. Complainant had requested the opposite parties for allotment of alternate plot, demanded interest on the deposited amount till the date of allotment of alternate plot and to refund already charged interest on account of offer of possession but opposite parties refused the same. As per condition no.7 of the allotment letter Ex.CW1/B, it is submitted by the opposite parties that : “The possession of the plot will be offered within a period or 3 years from the date of allotment(after completion of development work in the area). In case, possession of the plot is not offered within the prescribed period of 3 years from the date of allotment, HUDA will pay interest @ 9% (or as may be fixed by Authority from time to time) on the amount deposited by you after the expiry of 3 years till the date of offer of possession and you will not be required to pay the further installments. The payment of the balance installments will only start after the possession of the plot is offered to you”. The allotment letter Ex.CW1/B was issued on 21.05.2012 and as per the alleged terms and conditions, the possession of the plot was to be offered within 3 years i.e. upto 21.05.2015 but the offer of possession could not be issued to the complainant due to pending litigation before the Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana. As such the complainant has sought alternate plot alongwith compensation. Ld. counsel has also placed reliance upon the ratio of law laid down in II(2014)CPJ 495(NC) titled as Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Sun Rise Engineering Corporation, II(2010)CPJ35(NC) titled as HUDA Vs. Nishtha Suhag, II(2010)CPJ113(NC) titled as Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Raj Pathak & Anrs., IV(2013)CPJ365(NC) titled as Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Pawan Kumar Gupta and 1(2013)CPJ544(NC) titled as Haryana Urban Development Authority Vs. Kamlesh Goel.
6. On the other hand, contention of the opposite parties is that plot in question is under litigation in CWP No. 7064 of 2008 pending in the Hon’ble High Court, Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh and as the possession of the plot in question could not be given to the complainant. It is further contended that complainant is not entitled for any amount of refund since the property in question is already the subject matter of CWP No. 7064 of 2008 pending in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. Complainant is also not entitled for any alternate plot or refund of the amount of interest. The area in question is already fully developed. No question of accepting to the unlawful request of the complainant arises.
7. After going through the file and hearing the parties, it is observed that if some of the land including the plot in question of the complainant is under litigation, opposite party was duty-bound to allot the alternative plot to the complainant. But the same has not been done by the opposite party till date i.e. after passing of more than 10 years from the date of offer of allotment. The complainant should not suffer for not taking the decision by the higher authorities for sanction of alternate plot. In this regard, law cited above by ld. counsel for the complainant are fully applicable on the facts and circumstances of the case. Since the writ petition has already been decided by the Court. Hence the opposite parties are liable to give the possession of plot in question or another alternate plot in the adjoining area to the complainant and also liable to pay interest on the deposited amount. Perusal of affidavit Ex.PW1/A reveals that complainant has deposited the amount of Rs.790950/- w.e.f. 08.05.2012 to 10.04.2015. Hence the complainant is entitled for the interest on this amount of Rs.790950/- from dated 21.05.2015 to till the date of offer of possession. Thereafter he deposited an amount of Rs.281069/- on 15.12.2018, Rs.46845/- on 15.11.2018 and Rs.423851/- on 28.11.2018. As per copy of document Ex.CW1/D an amount of Rs.423851/-, as per Ex.CW1/E, an amount of Rs.46845/- and as per Ex.CW1/F(page no.5) an amount of Rs.281069/- respectively has been deposited on account of enhancement. Hence the complainant is not entitled for interest on this amount.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we hereby allow the complaint and direct the opposite parties in following manner:-i) Opposite parties shall deliver the possession of plot in question or the alternate plot of same size in the same sector or in adjoining sector to the complainant.
ii) As per terms and conditions of the allotment letter, complainant is not liable to pay interest on the remaining amount till the date of offer of possession. However, opposite party is free to demand the balance installments/any other amount after the date of offer of possession as per terms and conditions of the allotment letter.
iii) To pay interest on Rs. Rs.790950/- @ 9% p.a. from dated 21.05.2015 to till its realization.
iv). Opposite parties shall also pay a sum of Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as compensation on account of deficiency in service and harassment caused to the complainant for not delivering the possession within time and Rs.5000/-(Rupees five thousand only) as litigation expenses to the complainant.
Order shall be complied within one month from the date of decision.
9. 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:
09.03.2023.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member.
