CHARANJIT LAL Vs. CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR HUDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant Charanjit Lal, whose address given in the complaint is Booth No.22, Sector 47-C, Chandigarh, has invoked the original jurisdiction of this Commission by filing the instant complaint, alleging deficiency in service on the part of the Haryana Urban Development Authority in the matter of delivering vacant physical possession of plot No.1569 measuring 250 square yards, in Sector 23, Urban Estate, Sonepat.

(2.) According to the complainant, the aforesaid residential plot No.1569, Sector 23, Sonepat was allotted to him on 22.8.1991 vide allotment letter No.8694 dated 22.8.1991. The complainant had paid the entire price of the plot and there is no outstanding dues against him. HUDA had failed to deliver vacant physical possession of the plot to him, despite repeated requests made by him to the opposite party. The complainant had also approached the HUDA on 14.9.1998 to deliver him physical possession of the plot and a legal notice was also served upon the HUDA, that too, of no avail. However, the complainant was informed that the area, where the plot is situated, has not been developed so far. The complainant has further alleged that as per the HUDA Act possession of the plot is to be offered within two years of the issuance of the allotment letter after completion of the development work, i. e. upto 22.8.1993. The complainant has intended to construct 2.5 floors including basement, which comes to 3.5 floors. In between 1993 and 1998 the cost of construction has increased manifold. As due to callous attitude of the opposite parties, vacant physical possession of the plot was not delivered to him for a pretty long time, there is a deficiency in service on the part of HUDA and has claimed the following reliefs : (i) To hand over vacant physical possession of the plot. (ii) To pay a sum of Rs.10 lacs as cost of escalation from 1993 to 1998. (iii) To pay a sum of Rs.1.5 lacs by way of mental agony and physical torture for pursuing the matter. (iv) To pay Rs.1.8 lacs on account of rent paid for the accommodation of his family. (v) To pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- for expenditure on journey undertaken and correspondence with huda. (vi) To pay Rs.11,000/- as litigation charges.

(3.) Notice of the complaint was issued and in pursuance of which, HUDA has filed the written statement, wherein HUDA has taken a plea that development of civil works, i. e. W/s Sewerage, S. W. D. and Roads completed in the area subject to electrification report from the concerned S. D. E. The S. D. E. , HUDA, Electrical Sub-Division, Faridabad has reported completion of electrification in the area of plot allotted. The HUDA has offered possession to the complainant vide letter No.306 dated 13.1.1999, which was sent through registered A. D. The HUDA has further pleaded that price of the plot was tentative and can be increased as per Clause No.9 of the allotment letter. The competent Court had enhanced the compensation and demand notice of enhanced amount was issued to the complainant on 13.8.1997, but the complainant has not deposited the enhanced compensation. It has also been stated that the complainant has never approached the opposite party-HUDA for delivery of possession of the plot. Again it has been denied that the complainant had ever visited the office of HUDA for taking physical possession of the plot. It has also been pleaded that no legal notice was ever received by HUDA and there is no nexus between offer of possession and escalation in the cost of construction. Replication to the written statement was filed by the complainant in which he reiterated his stand as taken in the complaint and controverted the plea of HUDA.