NIRMAL SOOD Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by order dated 9.11.2012 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Panchkula (for short, 'State Commission ') petitioner /complainant has filed the present revision petition under Section 21(b) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short, 'Act'.

(2.) THE case of petitioner is that she was allotted plot no.262 measuring 14 marlas, situated in Urban Estate Sector -64, Faridabad by the respondent/O.P. vide allotment letter dated 21.8.2001. In compliance of the aforesaid allotment letter, petitioner deposited a sum of Rs.6,02,408/ - out of the total price of Rs.6,69,162/ -. The main grievance of the petitioner before the District Forum was that respondent failed to deliver the possession of the plot in question to her and due to this reason she has suffered on account of interest to the tune of Rs.2,07,027/ -. Alleging it a case of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, complaint was filed by the petitioner seeking damage to the tune of Rs.4,07,027/ - plus litigation expenses to the tune of Rs.22,000/ - from the respondent.

(3.) RESPONDENT resisted the claim of petitioner on the ground that a sum of Rs.5,35,191/ - was deposited by the petitioner in respect of the plot in question and the possession was to be delivered to her only after completion of the development work in the area and after providing all basic amenities and no interest on the instalments was to be charged from her till the offer of possession. Denying any kind of deficiency in service on its part, it was prayed that complaint be merit dismissal.