BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.      
Consumer Complaint no. 73 of 2021. Date of Institution :    19.03.2021.
Date of Decision :    06.08.2024.
Ravinder Choudhary, aged about 70 years son of Sh. Inder Nath Choudhary, resident of 59, Dwarka Puri, Near Head Post Office, Sirsa. 
                      ……Complainant.
Versus.
1. The Chief Administrator, HUDA Haryana, Office Complex, C-3, Sector-6, Panchkula. 
2. The Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority, Sirsa. 
3. The Secretary, Municipal Committee, Kalanwali.  
...…Opposite parties.
            Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
 
Before: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT SMT. SUKHDEEPKAUR………………………. MEMBER. SH. OM PARKASH TUTEJA…………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. R.S. Saxena, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. K.K. Malik, Advocate for opposite parties no.1 and 2. Opposite party no.3 already deleted.
 
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 initially against the opposite parties no.1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to OPs) and thereafter got impleaded op no.3 through an application.
2.  In brief, the case of complainant is that he had applied for allotment of 08 marlas plot in Kalanwali in Sector- KLN-RA-III at Urban Estate, Sirsa vide application No. 1556 under Advocate quota. The draw was held on 21.11.2014 and complainant received a letter from the office of the Estate Officer, HUDA, Sirsa vide memo No. 733 dated 11.02.2018 vide which it was informed that his application was considered and he has been allotted a plot in the sector and further he was also directed to submit documents regarding the proof of his residence etc. That complainant submitted desired documents with the office of op no.2 within stipulated time but he never received any allotment letter in his favour from HUDA Authorities. It is further averred that suddenly the complainant received a show cause notice under Section 17 (1) of HUDA Act, 1977 in respect of residential 08 Marla plot No. 998, Sector KALN-RA-III, Urban Estate, Sirsa issued by the office of op no.2 vide memo No. Z0003/E0009/UE017/US171/0000000056 dated 06.01.2020 vide which he was informed that said plot was allotted to him by the office of Estate Officer vide letter No.Z0003/e0009/UE017/ GALOT/00000000032 dated 10.03.2018. That as per letter dated 10.03.2018, the complainant was required to remit Rs.5,57,579/- but as he did not receive letter dated 10.03.2018, so he was not able to remit the said amount. It is further averred that vide letter dated 06.01.2020, the complainant was given show cause notice by Estate Officer, HUDA, Sirsa that he did not remit Rs.5,57,579/- therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 17(1) of the HUDA Act, why a penalty of Rs.55,578/- be not imposed upon him. The complainant was directed to give reply of the same within a period of thirty days from the date of issue of said letter otherwise it will be presumed that complainant has nothing to say in the matter. That complainant replied show cause notice vide his letter dated 03.02.2020 vide which he informed op no.2 that he has not received any allotment letter till date, so he was not able to pay the required amount and he further requested to issue allotment letter and to withdraw the said show cause notice. That office of Estate Officer did not consider the letter dated 03.02.2020 of the complainant and vide letter No. 137401 dated 02.09.2020 office of Estate Officer forfeited the ten percent security deposited by complainant and the allotment of plot was also cancelled and such act and conduct of ops shows negligence in performing proper service on their part and they have committed gross deficiency in service due to which complainant has suffered unnecessary harassment and mental agony and as such complainant is entitled to compensation of Rs. one lac from ops. Hence, this complaint seeking direction to the ops to restore/ issue fresh allotment letter of the plot in favour of complainant and to adjust the forfeited security towards the cost/ installment of plot and also to pay cost of proceedings to the tune of Rs.11,000/-. 
3.  On notice, ops no.1 and 2 appeared and filed written statement on 12.04.2020 submitting therein that complaint is neither maintainable in the present form nor sustainable in the eyes of law. On 16.02.2018 in a meeting of the Pradhikaran it was decided to transfer the 29 Mandi Township area from HSVP to the Urban Local Bodies Department and as per letter of HSVP Panchkula No. A6-UB-2018/52315-16 dated 19.03.2018, the Mandi Township Area Kalanwali was ordered to be transferred from HSVP to Urban Local Bodies Department. The entire record has been handed over by HUDA to Urban Local Bodies Department on 15.12.2020 and 21.01.2021, as such ops have left with no concern whatsoever of any kind with the plot in dispute and with these averments dismissal of complaint prayed for.
4.   It is pertinent to mention here that in view of above said written version of ops no.1 and 2, the complainant moved an application for impleading op no.3 which was allowed and op no.3 was impleaded in this complaint
5.    On notice, op no.3 also appeared and filed written version raising certain preliminary objections that complaint is not maintainable in the present form because HUDA department was maintaining Sector RA-III at Urban Estate Kalanwali up to January 2021 and in the year January 2021 HUDA department has handed over the colony for maintaining it, whereas the complainant has claimed relief for the year 2014 which is not legally sustainable in the eyes of law. That complainant is not consumer of answering op. Other preliminary objections regarding jurisdiction, cause of action, locus standi, non joinder and mis joinder of necessary parties, concealment of material facts and estoppal etc. were also taken. On merits also, it was asserted that since January, 2021 the answering op was allowed to look after and manage the sector in question and prior to it, answering op does not know about the proceedings. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint qua op no.3 made. 
6.   It is again pertinent to mention here that thereafter op no.3 moved an application for deleting the op no.3 on the ground that op no.3 has been unnecessary impleaded because op no.3 has no concern with the matter and Director Urban Local Bodies issued a letter dated 24.03.2023 to all urban local bodies department of Haryana to transfer the records from Urban Local Bodies department to HSVP, so the op no.3 has no concern with the said complaint. Learned counsel for complainant suffered a statement that he has no objection to delete op no.3 as per application and as such op no.3 was ordered to be deleted. Accordingly ops no.1 and 2 also moved an application to file fresh written statement and ld. counsel for complainant also made statement that he has also no objection to file fresh written statement as per application on behalf of ops no.1 and 2 and as such said application was also allowed.
7.   Ops no.1 and 2 accordingly filed fresh written statement on 06.03.2024 raising certain preliminary objections regarding maintainability, cause of action, concealment of true and material facts etc. On merits, it is submitted that draw was held on 21.11.2014 and complainant succeeded in getting the disputed plot. The complainant was allotted Plot No. 998 Sector KALN-RA-III Urban Estate Sirsa on 10.03.2018. A allotment letter to this effect was duly sent to the complainant vide letter No. 0032 dated 10.03.2018 through registered post on the address given by the complainant at the time of filing of the application. Since the said notice was issued to the complainant on his last known and correct address as supplied by complainant himself in his application, therefore, it is presumed that the same has been duly delivered to him and he has received the same. As per terms and conditions No.4 and 5, the allottee had to deposit the remaining 15% amount within a period of 30 days but the complainant/ allottee has failed to deposit the 15% amount as per terms and conditions and therefore 10% amount deposited by complainant/ allottee at the time of application is deemed to be forfeited. However, mistakenly and wrongly notice under Section 17 (1) of the Act vide memo No.Z0003/E0009/UE017/US171/000000056 was issued to the complainant to deposit the remaining 15 % amount. It is further submitted that this letter was wrongly and mistakenly issued to the complainant and same was withdrawn vide letter bearing No. 137401 dated 02.09.2020 and complainant was duly informed on the address given by him. As such the allotted plot was rightly cancelled/ resumed by answering ops and the complainant has failed to deposit the remaining 15% amount as per terms and conditions no.4 and 5 of the Act. It is further submitted that allotment letter was duly issued to the complainant but he failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the allotment letter and did not deposit the remaining 15% amount with the answering ops. That contents of complaint regarding issuance of show cause notice is admitted to be correct but the same has been issued to the complainant wrongly and mistakenly as detailed above and thus the same was later on withdrawn by the answering ops. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
8.  The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex.C1 and copies of documents i.e. application form Ex.C2, letter of op no.2 dated 11.02.2018 Ex.C3, application dated 09.03.2015 Ex.C4, show cause notice Ex.C5, reply to show cause notice Ex.C6 and letter dated 02.09.2020 Ex.C7.
9.  On the other hand, ops no.1 and 2 have tendered affidavit of Sh. Rajinder Kumar, HCS, Estate Officer HSVP, Sirsa as Ex.RW1/A and copies of documents i.e. intimation letter regarding allotment of plot dated 09.03.2018 Ex.R1, postal receipt dated 12.03.2018 Ex.R2, allotment letter Ex.R3, application of complainant dated 09.03.2015 Ex.R4, his affidavit Ex.R5, letter dated 11.02.2018 Ex.R6, letter 02.09.2020 regarding cancellation of allotment Ex.R7, noting of office Ex.R8, reply to show cause notice Ex.R9, affidavit Ex.R10 and show cause notice Ex.R11. 
10.  We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
11.  There is no dispute of the fact that complainant was allotted a plot of 08 marlas bearing No.998 in Sector of Kalanwali, District Sirsa under Advocate quota by ops no.1 and 2. The complainant alleges that as he did not receive the allotment letter dated 10.03.2018 from ops, so he was not able to remit the amount of Rs.5,57,579/- to the ops no.1 and 2 and the show cause notice dated 06.01.2020 for imposing penalty of Rs.55,758/- was duly replied by him on 03.02.2020 but ops did not consider his reply and vide letter dated 02.09.2020, the op no.2 has wrongly cancelled the allotment of plot and has wrongly forfeited ten percent security amount deposited by complainant. Though earlier a show cause notice dated 06.01.2020 was issued to the complainant by op no.2 asking him that as he made default in payment of amount of Rs.5,57,579/-, therefore to show cause as to why a penalty of Rs.55,758/- should not be imposed upon him but through subsequent letter dated 02.09.2020 (Ex.C7), the op no.2 intimated the complainant that as he failed to deposit 15% amount of the plot in question within 30 days from allotment letter dated 10.03.2018, therefore, as per terms and conditions no. 4 and 5 while forfeiting 10% of deposited amount, his allotment of plot has been cancelled and show cause notice dated 06.01.2020 is withdrawn. Though ops no.1 and 2 have placed on file copy of allotment letter dated 10.03.2018 and have also placed on file postal receipt dated 12.03.2018 showing that letter dated 09.03.2018 (copy Ex.R1)  was dispatched to the complainant but there is nothing on file to prove that said allotment letter was ever received to the complainant because no acknowledgment of complainant is placed on file. Moreover, it is proved from the letter of op no.2 itself dated 09.03.2018 that allotment letter was sent to the State Bank of India i.e. bank of complainant and not to the complainant. Further more the date of allotment of plot was 10.03.2018 whereas the letter bearing Memo No. 577 (copy Ex.R1) is of dated 09.03.2018 and it shows malafide and wrong intention of the ops no.1 and 2 because when the allotment date was 10.03.2018 then how letter could be sent in advance i.e. on 09.03.2018. No copy of the allotment letter has also been provided to the complainant whereas ops no.1 and 2 were required to provide either allotment letter or copy of allotment letter to the complainant. There is also nothing on file to prove the fact that bank of complainant ever informed the complainant about issuance of allotment letter of plot in question by ops no.1 and 2.  As such it is proved on record that as complainant did not receive allotment letter dated 10.03.2018 from ops, therefore, he could not pay 15% amount as per schedule and as such complainant is not at fault. When complainant has not received the allotment letter from ops no.1 and 2, therefore, cancellation of allotment of his plot and forfeiture of the security amount of complainant by the ops no.1 and 2 on the ground of non payment of 15% amount of plot is wrong and illegal because terms and conditions no.4 and 5 of the allotment letter will not apply to the complainant because it is proved on record that he has not received allotment letter from ops no.1 and 2 and there is deficiency in service on the part of ops no.1 and 2. As such the order of ops no.1 and 2 in this regard is hereby set aside. 
12.   In view of our above discussion, we allow the present complaint and direct the opposite parties no.1 and 2 to issue fresh allotment letter of the plot in question i.e. plot no. 998 to the complainant at the same rate and to make refresh schedule of remaining amount receivable from the complainant in lieu of the plot in question giving gap in installments as per their rules/ allotment letter dated 10.03.2018 after adjusting security amount/ 10% amount already deposited by the complainant. The complainant will deposit 15% amount of the plot in question to the ops no.1 and 2 after receiving fresh allotment letter and will pay remaining amount as per payment schedule of ops no.1 and 2. In case it is found that now said plot is not available, then ops no.1 and 2 will make allotment of an alternative plot to the complainant in the said sector on same terms and conditions. We also direct the ops no.1 and 2 to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as composite compensation for harassment and litigation expenses to the complainant. The ops no.1 and 2 are liable to comply with this order within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.   

Announced. Member Member President
Dt. 06.08.2024. District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Sirsa.