District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission ,Faridabad.
Consumer Complaint No. 01/2021.
Date of Institution:05.01.2021.
Date of Order: 22.02.2023.
Birpal Singh s/o Shri Lakhpat Singh R/o H.No. 1606, Sanjay Colony, Sector-23, Gali No.8, Fairdabad (Hr.) Pin No. 121004.
…….Complainant……..
Versus
1. Housing Board Haryana (through its Chairman) C-15, Awas Bhawan, Sector-6, Panchkula, Haryana – 134109.
2. The state of Haryana (through its Chief Secretary) R/o 4th floor, Haryana Civil Secretariat, sector-1, Chandigarh.
…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: Smt. Rachna, counsel for the complainant.
Sh. Rajiv Rana, counsel for opposite party No.1.
Opposite party No.2 ex-parte vide order dated 15.2.2022.
ORDER:
The facts in brief of the complaint are that the complainant registered for these applications through registration No. 225/FBD65/T-A/CBI after paying registration fee for an amount of Rs.2,04,000/- drawn at Punjab National Bank bearing No. 759740 dated 10.05.2014 as earnest money in terms of allotment letter 10% amount was to be paid with the applications. Opposite party No.1 through lucky draw held on 30.12.2014, allotted flat/apartment at Faridabad 2,62,75 Conv.Into Sector-65 and acknowledged the complainant vide application dated 03.03.2015 and demanded 15% amount to be paid to the opposite party No.1. The complainant booked Type-A apartment having total sale consideration of Rs.20,40,000/- in Sector-75 of Faridabad paid 15% amount of the total sale consideration, as demanded by the opposite party No.1, an amount of Rs.3,76,000/-. After making the payments and when asked by the opposite party No.1, the complainant visited at the site of the allotted apartment but till this time there was not even the construction material had been placed by the opposite parties. There was no construction started after getting the requisite payments from the complainant in the year 2014. The complainant wrote letter to opposite party No.1 but the opposite party No.1 intentionally failed to reply the letters of the complainant which clearly shows their malafide intentions and raises serious doubts on services of opposite party No.1. The complainant sent legal notice dated 14.07.2020 to the opposite parties but all in vain. 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) refund the amount of Rs.5,80,000/- paid by the complainant towards the total sale consideration of the apartment as per the allotment letter.
b) grant interest @ 20% p.a. from the respective dates when the complainant made payment of the instalments to the opposite party No.1 till the realization of the decretal amount.
c) pay Rs. 5,,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment .
d) pay Rs. 1,00,000 /-as litigation expenses.
2. Opposite party No.1 put in appearance through counsel and filed written statement wherein Opposite party No.1 refuted claim of the complainant and submitted that the answering opposie party was allotted the land measuring 7.5 Acre vide Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad, memo No. 12641-43 dated 19.06.2014, sEctor-65, Faridabad for the construction of multi-storeyed flats for defence personnel. It was submitted that accordingly the possession of the land was handed over by the Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad memo No. 1169 dated 24.06.2014 and at the time of possession there was a as Godown building on the said land, which was pointed out the HUDA authorities to which they replied that the gas Godown should be dismantled and removed and the site should be free from all encumbrances. On 11.07.2014 Godown was demolished by HUDA and 80% of the malba was also removed from the site. It was further submitted that the office of Executive Engineer, HUDA, Faridabad had been in regular tough with HUDA for solving the matter. The Executive Engineer, HBH, Faridabad vide office letter NO. 5347 dated 05.12.2016 had asked Estate Officer, HUDA, Faridabad for an early settlement of the case. Again the Executive Engineer, HBH, Faridabad vide office letter No. 5384 dated 09.12.2016 to the Senior Town Planner, Faridabad had requested for revised zoning of the group housing site. It was further submitted that ATP Housing Board Haryana, Panchkula vide office letter No. 2355 dated 17.04.2017 addressed to the Executive Engineer, HBH, Faridabad had intimated that the competent authority of Housing Board had accorded the approval to give the consent regarding revised possession of clear undisputed land in 2 pockets. It was further submitted that Administrator HUDA, Faridabad vide office letter NO. 3480 dated 12.05.2017 addressed to the Chief Administrator HUDA (Town Planning Wing) Panchkula, sent Zoning plans of two pockets of GH set as GH site No.1 to GH site No.2 alongwith the proceeding of Zonal committee meeting for final decision form competent authority. From 12.05.2017 till now the case for approval of revised zoning plan was till lying with the Chief Administrator HUDA, Panchkula. Despite issuing several reminders from the Executive Engineer, HBH, Faridabad and CTP, HBH Panchkula to Administrator HUDA, Faridabad and the Chief Administrator HUDA Panchkula for approving the revised zoning plan of the sites of GH-1 to GH-2, Sector-65, Faridabad. Now the department had approved the revised zoning plan vide his letter No. 140660 dated 12.07.2018 but not got stay vacated from the Hon’ble High Court. So this office was completely helpless to start the construction work until the above formalities were completed by HUDA. The drawings were submitted to estate Officer, Faridabad for approval. The matter was still pending with STP office, Faridabad for approval due to set back adjustment as per height. Thus, this office was helpless to start the work. Opposite party No. 1 denied rest of the allegations leveled in the complaint and prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
3. Case called several times since morning but none appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2. Therefore, opposite party No.2 was hereby proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.02.2022.
4. The parties led evidence in support of their respective versions.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record on the file.
6. In this case the complaint was filed by the complainant against opposite parties– Housing Board & Anr. with the prayer to: a) refund the amount of Rs.5,80,000/- paid by the complainant towards the total sale consideration of the apartment as per the allotment letter. b) grant interest @ 20% p.a. from the respective dates when the complainant made payment of the instalments to the opposite party No.1 till the realization of the decretal amount. c) payRs. 5,,00,000/- as compensation for causing mental agony and harassment . d) pay Rs. 1,00,000 /-as litigation expenses.
To establish his case the complainant has led in his evidence, Ex.CW1/5 – affidavit of Birpal Singh, Ex.CW1/1 - brochure,, Ex.CW1/2 - photocopy of demand draft for Rs.2,04,000/-, Ex.CW1/3 - letter dated 3.3.2015 regarding allotment of flat for serving/ex-defence and para-Military personnel of Haryana upto to the rank of JCOs & equivalent and their widows or orphans on Hire Purchase Basis at : FBD 2,62,75 Conv.IntoEctor-65, Ex.CW1/4 – notice,
On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.1 strongly agitated and opposed. As per the evidence of the opposite party No.1 – Ex.RW1/A – affidavit of Shri R.A.GAutam, Estate Manager, Housing Board, Haryana, Faridabad, Ex.R-1 – brouchure, Ex.R-2 - order dated 14.07.2014 passed by the Hon’ble Court of Punjab & Haryana, Chandigarh, Ex.R-3 – letter dated 12.5.2017 regarding approval of construction of flats for Defence person, sector-65, Faridabad.
7. In this case, the complainant booked Type-A apartment having total sale consideration of Rs.20,40,000/- in Sector-75 of Faridabad and paid 15% amount of the total sale consideration, as demanded by the opposite party No.1, an amount of Rs.3,76,000/-. Opposite party has converted the booked apartment of the complainant into Sector-65 without any reasons. The complainant has visited at the site of the allotted apartment but till this time there is not even the construction material has been placed by the opposite parties. There is no construction started after getting the requisite payments from him in the year 2014.
8. After going through the evidence led by the parties, the Commission is of the opinion that the complaint is allowed Opposite party No.1 is directed to refund the amount as per agreement alongwith interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of complaint till its realization. The opposite party No.1 is also directed to pay Rs.2200/- as compensation on account of mental tension, agony and harassment alongwith 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: 22.02.2023 (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.
