INDRA GUPTA Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 21.06.2007 passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (in short, 'the State Commission') in Appeals No. 2213 & 3146/2002 by which order dated 13.8.2002 passed by the District Forum in favour of the petitioner was set aside.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner was allotted plot No. 635 -P in Sector 14, Part II, Urban Estate (UE), Karnal for a sale consideration of Rs.44,878.80 by the respondent vide allotment letter dated 11.9.1985. The petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.28,278/ - till 7.1.1991 but the respondent failed to develop the area in spite of letters written by the petitioner. The petitioner made a representation on 25.9.1991 and requested allotment of an alternative site in Sector 7, Karnal. The respondent, instead of allotting a plot in Sector 7, allotted plot no. 972 -P in Sector 9, UE, Karnal vide allotment letter dated 9.4.1992 at the same price but this plot was located in a very inferior and undeveloped sector. The respondent also sent notice for payment of additional price of the plot amounting to Rs.40,819/ -. In response to the notice, the petitioner requested to restore the allotment of original plot or pay difference in the market price of the plots. Respondent No.3 vide letter dated 14.7.1994 demanded Rs.32,510/ - as amount of balance instalments along with interest for delayed payment, besides amount of Rs.40,819/ - towards enhancement of land price. So, the complaint was filed before the District Forum.

(3.) THE respondent submitted written statement and alleged that the Scheme of Sector 14, Part II was abandoned by the Government of Haryana due to the pendency of litigation with original land -owners. So, the petitioner was allotted an alternative plot no. 972 -P which was accepted by her without any objection and further alleged that the alternative plot was in better site than the earlier allotted plot. It was further submitted that the enhanced price was demanded from the petitioner as per HUDA policy. Interest @ 15% p.a. had already been given to the petitioner for delayed payment on the deposited amount. Hence, the complaint may be dismissed.