RAVINDER NATH Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sh. Ravinder Nath of Rajinder Narian and Company, an accomplished advocate has filed the instant complaint against HUDA on the allegations that the opposite party allotted him plot no. 25 measuring 2035 sq. mtr. in Echleon Industrial Area, Sector-32, Gurgaon at the rate of agreed price of Rs.46,80,500. It is the case of the complainant that he paid price in full besides all other amounts demanded by the opposite party over a period of time we.f. December 1994 till 11.06.2001. The total amount paid was Rs.63,71,159/-. Since there was some excess payment, a sum of Rs.11,973/- was refunded by the opposite party with covering letter dated 22.02.99. It is further the case of the complainant that as per clause 7 of the allotment letter, possession of the site was to be delivered on completion of development work in the area. The possession, however, was not delivered despite of several letters written by the complainant to the Opposite Party. Claiming this to be deficiency in service, the complainant has raised consumer dispute with following prayer:

(2.) The Opposite Party on being served with the notice filed a counter to the complaint wherein it was pleaded that complainant has not approached this Commission with clean hands and he has filed some forged letters annexed as Annexure D to the complaint to make out a case for him. It was pleaded by Opposite Party that as per the terms and conditions of the allotment, the complainant was supposed to raise construction on the plot within five years of the offer of possession, which the complainant has failed to do and in order to get out of his own wrong, he has filed the consumer complaint. During the pendency of the consumer complaint, our predecessor Bench vide order dated 07.09.2009 issued following directions:

(3.) Pursuant to the aforesaid directions of the bench, the possession is stated to have been delivered to the complainant and conveyance deed has been executed in his favour. In view of the aforesaid subsequent event, it is contended by the complainant that now he is praying that claim of Rs.14,20,000/- which was paid without prejudice to the Opposite Party pursuant to the order dated 07.09.09 besides compensation for escalated cost of construction and the deprivation of the user of the allotted plot.