Before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rohtak.
Complaint No. : 48
Instituted on : 29.01.2019
Decided on : 03.03.2023
Deepak Kumar aged-31 years S/o Sh. Ramesh Chander, R/o VPO Samargopalpur Tehsil & District Rohtak, (HR)
………..Complainant.
Vs.
- HSVP through its Chief Administrator, Panchkula
- Administrator HUDA, Rohtak.
- Estate Officer HUDA, 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. R.K.Sapra, Advocate for opposite parties.
ORDER
NAGENDER SINGH KADIAN, PRESIDENT:
1. Brief facts of the case as per the complainant are that a plot No.153GP Sector 5, Rohtak measuring 334.90 Sq. Mts.(14 Marla) was Re-allotment to the complainant by the opposite parties vide office memo no.138/2 dated 19.11.2013 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 development facilities had not been provided by the opposite parties in the area of the plot in question since the area around the plot in question is under litigation and as such the possession of the plot cannot be given to the complainant. No water supply, sewerage system, road and electricity facility have been provided to the plot in question till date. The respondents are pressing hard for making the payment of balance amount and have raised interest of the balance amount in contravention of conditions of allotment letter and HUDA Policy. Opposite parties have also issued notice vide EO letter No.9762 dated 26.10.2017 for demanding payment of Rs.2607350/- as enhanced amount. Thereafter complainant made request to allot an alternate plot in lieu of his original plot, to pay 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 his original plot and to refund the interest already 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, also to pay Rs.22,000/- as litigation charges, 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 and to allot alternate plot in lieu of his original plot No. 153GP Sector-5, Rohtak of the same size and in the same location.
2. After registration of complaint, notice was issued to the opposite parties. Opposite parties in their reply has submitted that the possession could not be offered to the allottees of the plot being the matter was subjudice before the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High court at Chandigarh. As such, no development work could be executed at the site by the opposite parties. Now the matter has finally been decided by the Hon’ble High Court on 25.07.2019 and it has been decided to carry out the development work in the area at the earliest so that the possession of the plots of the allottees be offered and delivered to them. The Estate Officer, Rohtak vide his letter bearing no.3292 dated 20.08.2019 has requested for the same to the Executive Engineer, HSVP, Division No.1, Rohtak. The possession could not be offered to the complainant due to pendency of the case before the Hon’ble High Court. 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.PW1/A, documents Ex.PW1/B to Ex.PW1/K and has closed his evidence on dated 14.09.2021. On the other hand, ld. counsel for the opposite parties has tendered affidavit Ex.RW1/A, documents Ex. R1 to Ex. R6 and has closed his evidence on dated 15.03.2022.
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 re allotment letter memo no.138/2 dated 19.11.2013 and offer of possession was to be made upto 18.11.2016. The complainant has submitted detail of deposit of amount with the respondent in his affidavit tendered as Ex.CW1/A in his evidence on dated 23.11.2021, which is as follows:
(i) Rs.315000/- dated 18.06.2013
(ii) Rs.576600/- dated 07.08.2013
(iii) Rs.428000/- dated 27.06.2014
(iv) Rs.430000/- dated 01.07.2015
(v) Rs.427000/- dated 24.06.2016
(vi) Rs.430000/- dated 21.06.2017
(vii) Rs.670892/- dated 22.04.2021
(viii) Rs.1000550/- dated 22.04.2021
The total deposited amount comes to Rs.4277442/-
As per complainant, the area of plot in question was 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 and possession 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 28.06.2013 and as per the alleged terms and conditions, the possession of the plot was to be offered within 3 years i.e. upto 27.06.2016 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 was under litigation in CWP No. 11338 of 2015 pending in the Hon’ble High Court, Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh which was decided on 25.07.2019. Hence 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 was already the subject matter of CWP No. 11338 of 2015 pending in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh. It is further submitted in the affidavit that no such request regarding alternate plot has been made by the complainant, however, it is pointed out here that the complainant was made aware that the Estate Officer, H.S.V.P.Rohtak vide letter Memo No.9694 dated 09.10.2018 has sent the matter to the Administrator, HSVP, Rohtak for alternative plot and the matter was further forwarded to the higher authorities concerned and it was told to the complainant that as and when the final decision will be taken the same will be communicated to the complainant and the same shall also be complied by the opposite parties.
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 9 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.2176000/- w.e.f. 18.06.2013 to 24.06.2016. Hence the complainant is entitled for the interest on this amount from the date of offer of possession i.e. 28.08.2016. Thereafter he deposited an amount of Rs.430000/- on 21.06.2017, Rs.670892/- on 22.04.2021 and Rs.1000550/- on 22.04.2021. The amount deposited on 22.04.2021 includes EDC & IDC whereas the instalment amount is Rs.428000/- each. Hence the complainant is only entitled for interest upon the instalments amount from the date of their respective deposits.
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) To pay interest on Rs.2176000/- @ 9% p.a. from dated 28.06.2016 to till its realization.
iii) To pay interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.430000/- from dated 21.06.2017 to till its realization.
iv) To pay interest @ 9% p.a. on Rs.856000/- from dated 22.04.2021 to till its realization.
v). 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:
03.03.2023.
................................................
Nagender Singh Kadian, President
..........................................
Tripti Pannu, Member.
……………………………….
Vijender Singh, Member.
