HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. M S SODHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal received by transfer from Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission against the order of District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Gurgaon dated 11.7.2002 passed in complaint case No. 706 of 1.8.2001. The contextual facts in brief are as under.

(2.) IN his case before the Forum, the respondent/complainant was aggrieved against the non provision of facilities to shop No. 14 at Sector 29, Gurgaon purchased on 26.4.2000 for consideration of Rs. 10,51,000 out of which Rs. 5,10,750 was deposited by him. It is also alleged by the complainant that the quality of construction of the shop is poor, the area had not developed. It is averred that vide letters dated 28.5.2001, 30.4.2001, 23.7.2001, 17.7.2001 and 15.9.2001 the attention of the authorities to lack of development was drawn but the OPs failed to take any action. It is further stated by the complainant that security amount of Rs. 2190 towards the electricity was deposited by him on 6.7.2000, but the meter has not been provided. The meter had also been purchased by him and deposited with the OP No. 2. The complainant has also stated that it came to his notice that the OP No. 2 has stated that OP No. 1 has failed to deposit the development charges, the development site plan has not been submitted due to which the electric connection cannot be issued. The complainant has submitted that he is not liable to pay the interest on the instalments as the area (on the date the complaint was filed) is totally undeveloped.

(3.) THE complaint was contested by the OPs. In the reply filed by OP No. 1 the possession of the shop No. 14 for the consideration as stated in the complaint stands admitted. It is denied that quality of the construction is poor or the development of the area has not taken place. It is submitted that all the facilities like water, sewerage, electricity and telephone etc. have been provided. It is further stated that interest has been levied as per terms and conditions of allotment letter dated 26.4.2000. It is reiterated that the area is developed and all the facilities stands provided. The averments of the complainant with regard to the lack of amenities have been vehemently denied.