ESTATE OFFICER, HUDA vs Gurdeep Singh

THE Haryana Urban Development Authority has come up in appeal against the following order of the learned District Forum:- "Present: - Complainant with Mr. R.S. Jain, Advocate. Mr. Satbir, Asstt. Draftsman for the respondent. THE matter has been discussed and during that Complainant has come forward to have the refund of his deposited amount of Rs. 12,250/- as respondent has not yet started the development of the said area. We under the given circumstances accordingly direct the respondent to refund the amount of Rs. 12,250/- with interest @ 18% p.a. within one month. THE case is accordingly accepted and disposed of."

IN appeal before us, learned Counsel for the appellant has however contended that as before the date of hearing, which was fixed for 20th of June, 1994, the appellant-HUDA had already offered possession of the site in question to the Complainant vide their letter dated 20th of May, 1994, therefore, instead of allowing the complaint, learned District Forum has to dismiss the same as anfractuous. We do not agree with this contention, inasmuch as the Complainant had claimed refund of his deposits with HUDA only after having awaited for a considerable long period. If the development work in the area had not even started, the Complainant was not bound to await for the same for an indefinite period. Therefore, if the appellant-HUDA had offered possession of the site in question after the Complainant had approached the District Forum, learned District Forum was not bound to dismiss the complaint as anfractuous. Consequently, we do not find any legal infirmity in the decision of the learned District Forum and the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.