LAWS(NCD)-2010-5-58

HUDA Vs. THAKUR DUTT

Decided On May 06, 2010
HUDA Appellant
V/S
THAKUR DUTT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent was allotted plot No. 705/6, Panchkula by petitioner authority on 22.9.1980 which was followed by requisite deposits made by respondent. Construction over site was accomplished and also occupation certificate was made available by petitioner to respondent on 12.4.1985. Petitioner also issued No Dues Certificate to respondent on 1.2.1990 showing no liability of respondent for further deposit. However, after respondent moved petitioner for execution of conveyance deed, petitioner raised demand of Rs. 92,903 on 5.10.2005. Aggrieved with demand raised, door of Consumer Fora was knocked by respondent filing a complaint which was resisted by petitioner. District Forum on evaluation of pleadings of parties, while accepting complaint of respondent directed petitioner not to raise demand as contemplated by letter in question and if any deposit had been made by respondent, that be refunded to them. Further direction was made for execution of conveyance deep and compensation of Rs. 2,000 was also awarded. Appeal too preferred by petitioner did not find favour with State Commission which having affirmed finding of District Forum dismissed appeal.

(2.) Contentions raised by learned Counsel for petitioner for No Dues Certificate issued by petitioner was that it was provisional subject to outcome of audit and since in course of audit liability of respondent to make further payment was noticed further demand was raised against him.

(3.) I am told by parties that demand of Rs. 92,903 comprises of Rs. 86,943which is instalments due against respondent and Rs. 5,160 cost including interest. The grievance of respondent had been that except making bald submissions Audit Report which was shown to be the sheet anchor behind which further demands were raised has never been placed on record by petitioner either before District Forum or State Commission and this is the state of affair even in revision. Regard being had to the finding of Fora below, finding no merit revision petition is dismissed with no order as to cost.