HUDA Vs. PARVEEN KUMAR JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed under section 21(b) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the impugned order dated 06.04.2010, passed by the Haryana State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Commission') in Appeal No. 260/2004, "Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA) Vs. Parveen Kumar Jain", vide which, while partly accepting the said appeal, the order passed by the District Forum Hisar dated 05.11.2003 in consumer complaint No. 1012/99, filed by the present respondent, was modified.

(2.) The facts of the case are that the opposite party (OP) HUDA allotted plot No. 25-SP in Sector 6, Hansi, Hisar, Haryana to the complainant/respondent vide their memo No. 11981 dated 23.07.199 The total cost of the plot was stated to be 3,11,472.00. It is stated in the consumer complaint that the complainant had paid the entire price of the plot in question. However, the HUDA did not complete the development works in that sector within a reasonable time and did not offer possession of the plot in question till March 1996. The HUDA sent memo No. 3478 dated 7.03.96, offering the possession of the plot to the complainant, but the same was withdrawn by them vide memo No. 6109 dated 04.04.96 on the ground that a high tension electricity line was passing over the plot in question. The HUDA again offered the possession of the plot in question vide their Memo no. 1573 dated 10.11.98. The complainant alleged that the development works in the sector were not complete even at that time and the HUDA had offered the possession in order to avoid their liability of payment of interest on the amount deposited with them. The complainant also stated that prior to the offer of possession on 10.11.98, the HUDA had issued another letter dated 03.09.1998, asking for the consent of the complainant for allotment of plot No. 10/P or 24/P by draw of lots. The complainant filed the consumer complaint in question, seeking interest @18% p.a. on the amount deposited by him with the OP HUDA from the date of deposit till the date of offer of possession of the plot in question and also to pay a compensation of 1 lakh on account of mental harassment etc. and another sum of 1 lakh as difference in cost of construction material prevailing in the years 1992 and 1999. It was also stated in the consumer complaint that if the HUDA was not in a position to offer possession of plot No. 25SP due to crossing of high-tension electricity wires, they may offer alternative plot 10P or 24P in the same sector and refund the excess amount of 51,912.00 to him.

(3.) The complaint was resisted by the OP HUDA by filing a written statement before the District Forum, in which it was stated that they had offered possession of the plot to the complainant vide letter dated 10.11.98 after completing all kinds of development works in the area. The OP HUDA vide letter dated 008.1998 had offered two alternative plots, namely, 10P and 24P to the complainant, but he had refused to take over the possession of both these plots vide his letter dated 2.12.1998. The complainant was, therefore, not entitled to the grant of any compensation and the complaint deserved to be dismissed.