DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. INDRA PRAKASH KATYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Complainant Indra Prakash Katyal applied to the Delhi Development Authority (hereinafter be referred as DDA) for conversion of his property from leasehold to freehold. It is the say of the complainant that instead of taking action within a period of 90 days, as per the procedure, the DDA has taken more than two years to do the same and as such deficient in providing the service.

(2.) Complainant had applied for conversion on 18.11.1999 by depositing Rs. 22,955 with the DDA along with the documents. On 1.2.2000 the DDA asked the complainant to submit copies of two challans for payment of the ground rent. It was sent to DDA by registered post on 2.2.2000. Complainant alleges that the DDA again sent a letter dated 7.4.2000 asking him to supply the same copies, which were sent again by him on 17.4.2000. As he was being harassed by the officials of DDA, the complainant approached the Ministry of Urban Development for expediting the matter. He was asked to visit the DDA office personally on 8.2.2001 as he had lost the original leasedeed and he supplied a certified copy of the leasedeed. He was further asked to pay additional ground rent of Rs. 1,060 along with interest of Rs. 1,211. Complainant's complaint is that he had to pay an extra amount of Rs. 1,100 towards registration charges due to the delay in conversion. Accordingly, the complainant prayed for directions to pay interest @ 24% per annum on the amount of Rs. 22,955 which was retained by DDA for more than 90 days and claimed refund of Rs. 1,060 charged excessively towards the ground rent along with interest charged on Rs. 1,211 and claimed Rs. 50,000 as expenses and Rs. 1.00 lakh as compensation.

(3.) It was contended by the DDA that as they did not have the counterfoils of the amount deposited by the complainant they has asked him to provide the original copies, whereas he has given only the photocopies. Similarly, though, he was asked to submit the original lease deed but the complainant could give only the certified copy of the same, which caused delay in converting the leasehold right into freehold.